War of 1812 ‘Stamped’ on Our Memories

War of 1812 ‘Stamped’ on Our Memories
Timothy Spearman
Considering its historical significance to Canada it is surprising that so few stamps have been issued to commemorate the War of 1812. Only three Canadian stamps featuring themes related to the War of 1812 have been issued: one commemorating the birth of Sir Isaac Brock, “the Hero of Upper Canada,” one commemorating Laura Secord, and one in honour of Lieutenant-Colonel Charles-Michel de Saleberry. Tecumseh, who was an important ally, has never been portrayed on a Canadian stamp. He has, however, been honoured by Guernsey in a 1996 souvenir sheet that was produced for CAPEX 96.
The stamp representing Laura Secord is one of a 1992 se-tenant issue commemorating four legendary heroes. It depicts Laura courageously travelling through the woods to warn the British of an impending American attack on their position. The figures of Indians, who were preparing to ambush the Americans and whom she met along the way, are visible in the background.
Laura Secord, nee Ingersoll, was born in Massachusetts. She moved to Queenston, which is situated at the mouth of the Niagara River, with her family following the US War of Independence and then married James Secord, a Queenston merchant and volunteer “citizen soldier.” James was seriously wounded in the battle of Queenston Heights and was still disabled a year later in 1813 when American forces occupied his farmhouse. Overhearing the soldiers’ careless chatter about their mission to occupy the village of Beaver Dam, Laura slipped away to warn the British who were in that location. It was one of the compelling stories of the war; how she lost her shoes and walked in darkness, barefoot, through the woods, finally running into a British patrol under a Lieutenant Fitzgibbon to warn them of the American plans. In the meantime, Indians had learned of the American movements also and ambushed them on their way to Beaver Dam. A small band of Canadian militia also fired upon the rear of the American force. Fearing total annihilation, the American force, which comprised some 570 men, immediately surrendered to Lieutenant Fitzgibbon when he arrived on the scene.

 

war 1812 a
Charles de Salaberry (1778-1829) was commanding officer of the Provincial Corps of Light Infantry in Lower Canada (Canadian Voltigeurs), 60th Regiment of Foot. He received the rare Field Officers Gold Medal for his exceptional service in turning back a superior force of American regulars at the Battle of Châteauguay on 26 October 1813, thus saving Montréal from attack. This stamp is from a se-tenant pair issued in 1979.

war 1812 1

Tecumseh
Tecumseh was a charismatic Shawnee native leader who was brought up with a hatred of Americans, known as “Long Knives” to the Indians, following the death of his father in a bloody clash with Virginian militia. Concerned about the American westward expansion and encroachment onto Indian territory, Tecumseh supported the British in the War of 1812 in the hope that a British victory would assure the Indians of possession of their lands. Indian support to the British side of the war was a key factor in many of the British successes. Although no Canadian stamp has been issued commemorating Tecumseh, he has been honoured by Guernsey in a souvenir sheet that was produced for CAPEX ’96.
This sheet features a map showing Lake Erie, the cities of Detroit, Sarnia (named after Guernsey), York (Toronto) and Queenston Heights. On the £1 stamp Sir Isaac Brock is shown on his horse Alfred. The 24p stamp depicts Brock shaking hands with Tecumseh before their joint attack on Detroit. At this meeting, Brock gave Tecumseh the red sash from his uniform, and Tecumseh in turn gave Brock his elaborately beaded belt. Brock was wearing Tecumseh’s belt when he was killed in the battle of Queenston Heights.

war 1812 2

The stamp depicting Sir Isaac Brock issued in 1969 commemorates the 200th anniversary of his birth. In addition to his portrait, the stamp features Brock’s Monument, which marks his grave and is located near Queenston, Ontario. The statue of Major-General Brock stands atop a 56-metre column overlooking the territory that his troops successfully defended. The monument was completed in 1856. He was sent to Canada with the 49th Regiment in 1802 where he rose in rank to become in 1811 a major-general and Commander-in-Chief of the forces of Upper Canada. In truth, he was not entirely happy with his assignment and would have preferred the battlefields of Europe. Nevertheless, he planned the territory’s defence brilliantly and became a legendary hero when he was felled by a sharpshooter at the Battle of Queenston Heights on 13 October 1812.

war 1812   3

The Hemp War of 1812
The War of 1812 was fought over hemp. Europe and its colonies were very reliant on it at that time. It remained the mainstay of the fabric and textile industry until the 1820s, when the cotton gin moved in as a contender.
Refusing to grow hemp in America during the 17th and 18th centuries was against the law. You could be jailed in Virginia for refusing to grow hemp from 1763 to 1769 (G. M. Herdon, Hemp in Colonial Virginia). George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers grew hemp as mentioned in Washington and Jefferson Diaries. Jefferson smuggled hemp seeds from China to France then to America.  For thousands of years, 90% of all ships’ sails and rope were made from hemp. The word ‘canvas’ comes from the Middle English word “canevas” which comes from the Latin word cannabis. 80% of all textiles, fabrics, clothes, linen, drapes, bed sheets, etc. were made from hemp until the 1820s, with the introduction of the cotton gin.
The first Bibles, maps, charts, Betsy Ross’s flag, the first drafts of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were made from hemp as the U.S. Government Archives will attest. The first crop grown in many states was hemp. 1850 was a peak year for Kentucky producing 40,000 tons. Hemp was the largest cash crop until the 20th century as the State Archives attest.

The oldest known records of hemp farming go back 5000 years in China, although hemp industrialization probably goes back to ancient Egypt. What led up to the Battle of New Orleans, which, due to slow communications, was accidentally fought on January 8, 1815, two weeks after the War of 1812 had officially ended on December 24, 1814 by the signing of a peace treaty in Belgium.

In the 1700s and early 1800s, Cannabis hemp was, as it had been for thousands of years, the biggest business and most important industry on the planet. Its fibre pushed virtually all the world’s shipping. The world economy depended upon thousands of different products made from hemp.

From 1740 on, Russia, because of its cheap slave/serf labour, produced 80% of the western world’s cannabis hemp and finished hemp products, and was, by far, the world’s best-quality manufacturer of cannabis hemp for sails, rope, rigging and nets. Cannabis was Russia’s number-one trading commodity, ahead of furs, timber and iron.

From 1740 to 1807, Great Britain relied on Russia for 90% of its marine hemp; Britain’s navy and world sea trade were entirely dependent on Russian hemp; each British ship must replace 50 to 100 tons of hemp every year or two. There was no legitimate substitute since flax sails would start rotting in three months or less from salt and spray.

From 1793 to 1799 on, the British nobility was hostile toward the new French government primarily because the British were afraid that the 1789-93 French Revolution of commoners could spread, and/or result in a French invasion of England and the loss of its Empire and, of course, its nobility’s heads.

From 1803 to 1814, Britain’s navy blockaded Napoleon’s France, including Napoleon’s allies on the Continent. Britain accomplished the blockade of France by closing France’s access to the English Channel and Atlantic ports like the Bay of Biscay with its navy. Also, Britain controlled absolute access to and from the Mediterranean and Atlantic by virtue of its control of the straits of Gibraltar.

From 1798 to 1812, the United States declared its neutrality in the war between France and Britain. The United States even began to solve its own foreign problems by sending its navy and marines (1801-1805) to the Mediterranean to stop Tripoli pirates from collecting tribute from American Yankee traders operating in the area.

In 1803, Napoleon sold the Louisiana Territory to the United States for $15 million, needing money to press war with Great Britain and pursue control of the European continent, a bargain price of roughly two-and-a-half cents per acre. This area was about one-third of what is now the 48 contiguous states. The Louisiana Purchase gives rise to some Americans’ – mostly Westerners’ – dreamt of “Manifest Destiny.” That is, the United States should extend to the utmost borders of North America: from the top of Canada to the bottom of Mexico and from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

Britain continued to buy 90% of its hemp directly from Russia, but in 1807, Napoleon and Czar Alexander of Russia signed the Treaty of Tilset, which cut off all legal Russian trade with Great Britain, its allies, or any other neutral nation acting as agents for Great Britain in Russia. The treaty also set up a buffer zone in Poland between Napoleon’s allies and Russia.

Napoleon’s strategy through the treaty is to prevent Russian hemp from reaching England, thereby destroying Britain’s navy by forcing it to cannibalize sails, ropes, and rigging from other ships; and Napoleon believes that eventually, with no Russian hemp for its huge navy, Britain will be forced to end its blockade of France and the Continent.

From 1807 to 1809, the United States is considered neutral country by Napoleon, as long as its ships do not trade with or for Great Britain, and the United States considers itself to be neutral in the war between France and Great Britain. However, Congress passed the 1806 Non-Importation Pact. Congress also passed the 1807 Embargo Act, which stipulated that American ships could not bring or carry products to or from Europe. These laws hurt America more than Europe. However, many Yankee traders ignored the law anyway.

From 1807 to 1814, the Treaty of Tilset cut off trade with Russia, leaving Britain with no neutral countries or shipping lanes. Hence, any ship that trades with Napoleon’s “Continental System” of allies was considered the enemy and subject to blockade.

On this pretext, Britain confiscated American ships and cargo and sent the sailors back to the United States at the American ship owners’ expense.

Britain “impresses” some American sailors into serving in the British navy. However, England claims that they only “impress” those sailors who are British subjects – and whose American shipping companies refused to pay for the sailors’ return fares. Britain cunningly blackmail the captured American traders, after boarding and confiscating an American ship and bring it into an English port.

The deal – either lose your ship and cargo forever or undertake a voyage to Russia to acquire hemp for Britain, which agreed to pay American traders with gold in advance with more to come upon delivery of the hemp.

At the same time, the Americans will be allowed to keep and trade their own goods, consisting of rum, sugar, spices, cotton, coffee, tobacco, to the Czar for hemp – a double profit for the Americans.
From 1808 to 1810, our shrewd Yankee traders, faced with the choice of either running British blockades – and risking having their ships, cargo and crews confiscated – or acting as secret (illegal) licensees for Britain, with safety and profits guaranteed, mostly chose the latter.

John Quincy Adams (later to become President), who was American Consul at St. Petersburg in 1809, noted:

“As many as 600 clipper ships, flying the American flag, in a two-week period, were in Kronstadt” (the Port of St. Petersburg, once called Leningrad in the former USSR) loading principally cannabis hemp for England (illegally) and America, where quality hemp is also in great demand.

The United States passed the 1809 Non-Intercourse Act which resumed legal trade with Europe, except Britain and France. It is soon replaced with the Macon Bill resuming all legal trade.

Napoleon insisted that Czar Alexander stop all trade with the independent United States traders as he knew they were being coerced into being illegal traders to procure Britain’s hemp. Napoleon wanted the Czar to allow him to place/station French agents and troops in Kronstadt to make sure the Czar and his port authorities lived up to the treaty. The Czar refused, despite his treaty with France, and turned a “blind eye” to the illegal American traders, probably because he needed the popular, profitable trade goods the Americans were importing, as well as the hard gold he is getting from the Americans’ illegal purchases of hemp for Great Britain.

Napoleon orders the Czar to stop all trade with the American traders. The Czar responds by withdrawing Russia from that part of the Treaty of Tilset that would require him to stop selling goods to neutral American ships. Napoleon, infuriated with the Czar for allowing Britain’s life blood of navy hemp to reach England, bolstered hi army and launches a 2,000-mile invasion of Russia, planning to punish the Czar and ultimately stop hemp from reaching the British Navy.

England, again an ally and full trading partner of Russia, was still preventing American ships from trading with the rest of the Continent. Britain then blockaded all U.S. traders from Russia at the Baltic Sea and insisted that American traders had to secretly buy other strategic goods for them, specifically from Napoleon and his allies on the Continent who by this time were willing to sell anything to raise capital. By 1812, the United States, cut off from 80% of its Russian hemp supply, debates war in Congress.

Ironically, it was representatives of the western states who argued for war under the pretext of “impressed” American sailors. However, the representatives of the maritime states, fearful of loss of trade, argue against war, even though it is their shipping, crews, and states that are allegedly afflicted.

Not one senator from a maritime state voted for war with Great Britain, whereas virtually all western senators gave their assent, hoping to take Canada from Britain and fulfill their dream of “Manifest Destiny,” in the mistaken belief that Great Britain was too busy with the European wars against Napoleon to protect Canada. The western states win in Congress, and on June 18, 1812, the United States is at war with Britain. American enters the war on the side of Napoleon, who marched on Moscow that same month of June, 1812.

Napoleon was soon defeated in Russia by the harsh winter, the Russian scorched-earth policy, 2,000 miles of snowy and muddy supply lines – and by Napoleon not stopping for the winter and regrouping before marching on Moscow, as was the original battle plan. Of the 450,000 to 600,000 men Napoleon started with, only 180,000 ever make it back.

After initial success in war with the United States (including the burning of Washington in retaliation for the earlier American burning of Toronto (then Fort York and colonial Canadian capital of the time), Britain later found itself war-weary. Finding its finances and military stretched thin with blockades, war in Spain with France, and a tough new America on the seas, Britain agreed to peace, and signed a treaty with the United States in December 1814. The actual terms of the treaty gave little to either side. In effect, Britain agreed to never again interfere with American shipping. And the United States agreed to give up all claims to Canada forever, which America honoured, except for “54-40 or Fight”.

Haunts of War of 1812

The province of Ontario, Canada has seen its fair share of war, murder and mayhem over the years. According to paranormal research groups like Haunted Hamilton and the Toronto & Ontario Ghosts and Hauntings Research Society, Ontario boasts a number of haunted locations. Some of Ontario’s most infamous haunted spots have rich histories that also include tales of witchcraft, torture and unsolved crime.
Read more: Top 5 Most Haunted Places in Ontario

eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/list_7775288_top-5-haunted-places-ontario.html#ixzz1RZq3Qx69

Fort George
In Ontario Canada 1796, the British began work on Fort George at Niagara-on-the-lake, on the opposite shore of the Niagara River from the American Fort Niagara. Completed in 1802, Fort George housed the British army, local militia, and the Indian Department.
It was a substantial installation, boasting six earthen and log bastions linked by a wooden palisade and surrounded by a dry ditch. Inside the walls, the Royal Engineers constructed a guardhouse, log blockhouses, a hospital, kitchens, workshops, barracks, an officers’ quarters, and a stone powder magazine.
Situated on Lake Ontario near Niagara Falls, Fort George was a divisional headquarters for the British Army during the War of 1812. The fort saw many bloody battles during this period and was burned to the ground twice by the Americans. Fort George visitors report ghostly activity during daytime and nighttime hours. Areas around the fort with the most reports of paranormal activity are the larger blockhouse, the perimeter of the defensive wall and the officer’s quarters. Thousands of soldiers, both American and British, were killed on this historic site; reports claim a number of residual ghosts may not realize the War of 1812 is over.
Fort George was the scene of several battles during the War of 1812 with both sides suffering heavy losses. In May of 1813, the fort was destroyed by artillery fire and captured by the Americans. Most of the buildings suffered heavy damage and the British suffered heavy losses. The Americans used the fort as a base for invading Upper Canada, but were forced to retreat after the battles of Stoney Creek and Beaver Dams. The fort was retaken by British forces in December and partially rebuilt. After the war, the fort was abandoned in favour of Fort Mississauga and Butler’s Barracks. During the 1930’s, the original plans of the Royal Engineers guided the reconstruction of Fort George as a National Historic Site. The fortification was used by the Canadian Army as a military training base during the First World War and through the Second World War under the name Camp Niagara. The grounds were eventually abandoned by the military in 1965. The stone Powder Magazine is the only surviving building from the original fort, and is the oldest military structure in Ontario.
Fort George has now become known as one of Canada’s most haunted locations, there are regular ghost tours around the grounds. Most of the ghosts and spirits are found inside the Blockhouses they include that of a man walking across the upper floor, his footsteps are often heard by visitors. Several witnesses have reported seeing a grey haired, balding man peering out from behind the bunks. There have also been reports of a man dressed in white, reclining upon one of four bunk-beds. The ghost of a 9yr old girl, with shoulder length curly blonde hair, wearing a white flowing gown has been seen in the blockhouse her spirit is often seen by other children. Several visitors have spotted a child like translucent hand on the railing of the stairs, and a Caucasian man with dark features has been seen several times standing in a ground-floor window.
The Officer’s Quarters are known for the apparition of a young lady with long, slightly curly hair, seen in an original silver backed, gilt framed mirror from the 1790s. Footsteps can be heard shuffling through the halls, doors open and close on their own, and display railing gates have unlatched and opened on their own. On Campbell’s Bastion, the apparition of the upper half of a solider has been been patrolling the perimeter, his musket held at the ready.
After a recent ghost tour of Fort George a young lady explained that as the tour was leaving the fort at the end of the evening, she had seen a man standing beside the sentry box at the front gate. She describes him as a very skinny old man of perhaps seventy. He was wearing blue overalls and a red plaid shirt, and had very short grey hair which was slightly balding at the front. Although his cheeks were sunken and creased with wrinkles, there was a sparkle in his eyes as he smiled and waved as the tour filed by and moved out of the fort.
The Olde Angel Inn
The Olde Angel Inn (Niagara on the Lake) likes to boast about their ghost, a British soldier named Captain Colin Swayze. Originally built in 1789, this English style pub and Inn consists of a restaurant, pub, and has a Snug Room (originally meant for guests of high profile who didn’t want to be seen drinking). There are rooms on the second floor, and they also offer separate, historical cottages just steps away from the Shaw Theatre in Niagara-on-the-Lake.
During the War of 1812, Captain Swayze came to the pub, either to visit his sweetheart Euretta, or to take a break from the fighting. The American soldiers found him in the cellar hiding in a barrel during a surprise invasion. That was the end of Euretta’s love. It is said that he still walks around in that cellar, specifically in the women’s’ washroom where he died. He has been known to throw objects in the pub when staff are fighting, or interfere with the American beer taps. Some say that he also walks around the upper floor where the rooms are, but he’s generally happy as long as the British flag hangs over the front entrance. Any guests that dare to stay the whole night qualify for a Certificate of Survival. I would suggest booking as early as you can, especially if you want to stay in the Captain’s Room.

Website: http://www.angel-inn.com/
Drummond Hill Cemetery (and Lundy’s Lane) in Niagara Falls
Contrary to popular belief, very few cemeteries are haunted because it is very rare for a person to pass away in a graveyard unexpectedly. However, Drummond Hill Cemetery (and Lundy’s Lane) in Niagara Falls is the actual field where Canada’s bloodiest and most brutal battle took place on July 25, 1814 as the War of 1812 was coming to an end. The Americans marched up the hill towards British ground where they were ambushed in the dark fog. Soldiers could not make out who the enemies or allies were through the fog and gun powder smoke. The battle lasted six hours leaving almost two thousand men dead. In the Drummond Hill Cemetery you will find the graves of Lieutenant General Gordon Drummond and some of the soldiers, as well as Laura Secord.
On June 21, 1813, several American officers forced their way into the Secord home and ordered Laura to serve them dinner. Once the food and wine were served, the officers spoke of their plans to attack the remaining British resistance. At dawn, Laura snuck out of the house and travelled nineteen miles on foot and risked her life to warn the British. On some nights people have seen the red coats marching up the hill, or five, old Royal Scot soldiers limping across the field before disappearing. For more information you can visit: http://www.battleoflundyslane.com/
Maid of the Mist, Niagara Falls Maid of the Mist boat tours that take you right to the foot of Niagara Falls. It’s an amazing experience, and you realize very quickly that taking pictures from afar does not give you a full sense of the enormity and power of the falls. However, many people don’t know the legend of the Maid of the Mist.
When Indian tribes were inexplicably dying, they sent offerings of fruit to please the gods, Hinum and his two sons. There was no improvement, and they decided to sacrifice a beautiful woman every year. Lelawala, the chief’s daughter, was placed into a canoe and sent over the falls. Hinum’s sons caught her, and she agreed to become the wife of one of them under the condition that they save her people. Some people believe they have seen a young woman’s shape in the mist at the bottom of the falls; the spirit of Lelawala. Website:

http://www.maidofthemist.com/en/

Freemasonry in War of 1812
Freemasonry was one of the most important institutions brought by soldiers and pioneers into Upper Canada. It provided a rallying point for local Canadians, played a crucial role in strategic planning, boosted morale, and even transcended national loyalties. In fact, as we will see, no study of the War of 1812 can be regarded as complete, without a consideration of the role of Freemasonry.

When we look at any historical event, we should keep in mind that history is the sum total of many personal stories. As part of our look into Freemasonry in the War of 1812, we will also meet a few of the people who fought in that War.

The War of 1812 concluded on Christmas Eve 1814, with the signing of the Treaty of Ghent, but it would take some time for Upper Canada to recover. Many of the farms, mills and settlements in Southern Ontario and in the Niagara Peninsula had been reduced to charred ruins. On the Grand River, as many as 50% of all Iroquois warriors of military age had perished in the War. In the Kingston area, commerce, ship building and settlement had been severely disrupted.

Freemasonry had of course suffered greatly during hostilities. One obvious source of sorrow was that more times than we will ever know, a Masonic Brother on one side had fought against and sometimes killed another Masonic Brother.

The Craft as a whole was in disorder. For example, St. John’s Lodge of Friendship No. 2 in Niagara – St. David’s met on December 16, 1815. This was the first time they had been able to assemble since February 1813, because the Lodge building had been requisitioned as military headquarters for the local Canadian Militia and British Army. The December, 1815 minutes read as follows. “No election of officers, no St. John’s Day, owing to the War, dull times for the Craft.” For our study, it is important to recall that most of the British Regiments of Infantry and Artillery garrisoned in Upper Canada usually held their own Masonic Lodges. Traveling Warrants issued by the Grand Lodges of England, Scotland, or Ireland, authorized the Regiment to hold Lodge meetings anywhere the Regiment served. Local pioneer civilian Masons often attended these Lodges until they were able to establish one of their own in the new settlements. Good examples occurred in the Kingston area, where military Lodges were meeting as early as 1781. In the Niagara area, the 8th Kings Regiment stationed at Fort Niagara supported the first Loyalist Masonic refugees coming into that area after the American revolution.

The original capital of Upper Canada was located in Newark, now known as Niagara on the Lake, situated at the mouth of the Niagara River on Lake Ontario. The first Masonic Lodge built in Upper Canada was erected at Newark in 1791, and was in fact one of the first structures erected in the new community. As such, it was also pressed into service as a school, agricultural society hall, and place of worship for divine services. This emphasis on constructing the Lodge showed the strong Masonic roots of many of the original setters, such as Brother and Colonel John Butler of Butler’s Rangers, a veteran of the American Revolution.

Noted Masonic historian John Ross Robertson wrote the following words on Niagara.
“One might almost call the Niagara District the cradle of Masonry in Upper Canada, for its soil is indeed sacred to the cause of the Craft.”

While Niagara Masons constructed the first Masonic Lodge building, Freemasonry played a significant role in the development most pioneer settlements throughout the Province. By 1795, a dozen Lodges were reported on the Provincial Register. This does not count military Lodges, or Lodges meeting under other warrants, or even those meeting informally by immemorial right.

The village of Bath on the shore of Lake Ontario, at that time known as Ernestown, was a typical pioneer settlement. Originally settled in 1783 by United Empire Loyalist refugees from the American Revolution, it was developing an economy based on farming, logging, trade and shipbuilding. Freemasonry was part of this frontier community. For example, in 1804, it is noted that the local Lodge was re-designated by the Provincial Grand Master as # 13.

The influence of Freemasonry in 1812 had an important political influence on the new colony of Upper Canada. Many people assume that the colony at this time was settled exclusively by people of English descent. In actual fact, the population was much more diverse. United Empire Loyalists and later immigrants represented diverse ethnic backgrounds and spoke many languages. In Upper Canada, one would hear English, French, Palatine German, Dutch, Irish and Scottish Gaelic, as well as many different Aboriginal languages. Masons were represented in all of these cultural groups. Membership in the Craft therefore exerted a unifying influence through shared experience that helped create a sense of community on the frontier.

In their diplomatic work, the officers of the British Indian Department proved to be well skilled. Every Mason of military age would have also been a member of the Militia.
So the men who settled the colony, and built the pioneer Masonic Lodges, were also the same men who were called up as Militiamen to defend their new homes during the War.
Although the provincial capital moved to York or Toronto in 1796, Newark in 1812 retained many of its vestiges of the original capital. It continued to serve as the local military headquarters, with nearby Fort George being the principal garrison for the British Army, the local Militia, and the Provincial Marine.

One of the British Regular soldiers who was charged with protecting the Niagara frontier was James Fitz Gibbon. Born in Ireland, he spoke both Irish Gaelic and English. He enlisted in the 49th Regiment of Foot in 1797 at the age of 17, and served in the Napoleonic Wars in Europe as a Sergeant.

In 1802, the Regiment was posted to duty in Quebec, which gave Fitz Gibbon the opportunity to become a Mason in Merchant’s Lodge # 40. Under the able military direction of his superior officer, Colonel Isaac Brock, Fitz Gibbon was promoted to Sergeant Major and eventually Lieutenant. The Regiment, along with Fitz Gibbon, was later posted to Upper Canada. By then Colonel Brock had become General Brock. (We have not yet been able to associate Brock with a specific Masonic Lodge. However, as an officer in the Regular Army, he would have been familiar with the concept of military Lodges.)

Another important military group stationed at Newark was the British Indian Department, whose headquarters was located adjacent to Fort George. This organization was charged with maintaining the alliance between the British Crown and the First Nations of North America, and formed a major part of the strategy for the defense of Upper Canada against the United States.

A strong alliance with the First Nations was a strategic priority for the British. The location of First Nations settlements in Upper Canada and in American Territories served as a sort of buffer state between British and American interests. In addition, the psychological value of Native warriors cannot be overestimated. After the American Revolution, the Americans demonized the role of Native warriors who had supported the British, and regularly accused them of all manner of atrocities in popular literature. By 1812, a whole generation of Americans had been raised on exaggerated myths of Native warriors as a vicious and dangerous foe, lurking in the wilderness, ready to pounce on any American invader who dared to venture into Upper Canada.

In their diplomatic work, the officers of the British Indian Department proved to be well skilled. Their success can be attributed to two reasons. First, they showed great respect to the warriors of the First Nations by learning their languages and customs. One of these traditions was the silver chain of friendship. Aboriginal tradition recalls that when European explorers first sailed to North America, the local Iroquois welcomed them as friends and allies. The warriors tied the explorers’ ship to a tree so they would not lose their new friends. However, the rope began to rot, so it was replaced with a silver chain. Unfortunately, silver will tarnish if it is not polished regularly. Therefore, to maintain the brilliance of the alliance, it was necessary to polish the silver chain of friendship, symbolically, by exchanging gifts across it.

The most important Aboriginal gift was wampum strings and belts, which held great value as records or reminders of significant events or agreements. For example, when General Brock was killed at Queenston Heights in 1812, the Iroquois presented a string of red wampum to honour his memory. In return, British officers would present weapons, tools and trade silver jewelry. It is important to note that much of the trade silver was ornamented with Masonic symbols. A painting of Chief Joseph Brant done in England in 1776 clearly shows him wearing silver broaches in the shape of the square and compasses, as well as a Masonic ball fob opened up in its form of a Christian cross.

Another important gift was the pipe tomahawk, which was both a weapon of war and a tool of diplomacy. Many pipe tomahawks were ornamented extensively with Masonic symbols. A nice example in a Detroit museum has a large silver square and compasses inlaid into the blade. The military significance of the pipe tomahawk is obvious. But at a formal meeting or council, the pipe tomahawk took on another significant role. It was tradition for the pipe to be smoked and passed around to all members at the start of any council. Tobacco was a sacred gift of the Creator and Mother Earth. When the smoke was inhaled, it was then blown to the sun to thank him for the gift of light, without which no life could exist. (The reference to light is a striking connection to Masonic ritual, which would not have been lost on any Masons taking part in the council.) Smoke could also be blown to the ground, to thank Mother Earth for her bounty. The pipe thus helped to set a proper tone for the deliberations and ultimate success of a council.

Many of the British officers of the Indian Department were indeed Masons, a tradition going back to the days of Sir William Johnson the Superintendent of Indian Affairs in the Crown Colony of New York, before the American Revolution. In fact, Sir William founded St. Patrick’s Lodge at Johnson Hall, on the grounds of his estate in Johnstown, New York, north of Albany.

John Butler, a senior officer in the Indian Department, was one of the officers of St. Patrick’s Lodge. He would later lead Butler’s Rangers in the American Revolution, and became one of the founders of modern Niagara on the Lake, and of Freemasonry in early Upper Canada. While it is not surprising that the officers of the British Indian Department were Masons, most people are intrigued to learn that a high proportion of Aboriginal warriors and chiefs were also Masons. The Enlightenment movement of the 18th century that favoured Freemasonry taught that Aboriginal peoples were “Noble Savages” or children of the wilderness unspoiled by civilization. Since Freemasonry embraced all men, First Nations warriors were natural candidates. In return, Aboriginal culture, always open to new concepts, embraced Freemasonry.

The Masonic Great Architect of the Universe was similar to the Aboriginal belief in the Creator who made the world, its animals and its people. Aboriginal culture was reinforced by rituals, signs and symbols. Any Aboriginal warrior would immediately recognize the importance and power of Masonic rituals, signs and symbols, and would thus be attracted to the Craft. Freemasonry thus created a cultural bridge that enabled men from very different cultural backgrounds to meet on the level for shared personal experiences. On a larger scale, it provided a foundation for the political alliance between the British Indian Department, and the chiefs and warriors of the First Nations. There was nothing to compare with this in the United States.

In 1812, in contrast, relations between American settlers and the First Nations south of the Great Lakes was often a war of extermination. The British Indian Department in 1812 was concerned with two main groups of First Nations. The first group was the remnants of the Six Nations of Iroquois from New York State, who had fought with the British during the American Revolution. One of the principal war chiefs of the Iroquois at that time was Chief Joseph Brant of the Mohawk Nation. Chief Brant was also Brother Brant. He was made a Mason in 1776 during a trip to London England. During the American Revolution, he had led his warriors on campaign for the Crown beside Brother and Colonel John Butler’s Corp of Rangers.

After the Revolution, many Iroquois were forced to leave the new United States as political refugees. Some 2,000 Iroquois had followed Joseph Brant, to new homes on the Grand River near Brant’s Ford, while another Iroquois settlement was founded at Deseronto, west of Kingston.

In Upper Canada, Brother Brant promoted Freemasonry in the new settlements. He was active in Lodge # 11 at the Mohawk Castle, near present day Brantford, and the Barton Lodge # 4 in Hamilton.

History took a significant turn in the early 1800’s at Grand River with the arrival of a man called John Norton. His ancestry was actually half Scottish and half Cherokee. Before he came to the Grand River, Norton had been a British soldier, and then a fur trader in the Ohio and Michigan Territories. When he arrived at the Grand River to work as a Christian missionary, Brant recognized Norton’s leadership skills, and encouraged his participation in Iroquois affairs. Brant eventually adopted Norton as a Mohawk with the Mohawk name Teyoninhokarawen. Like his adopted Father before him, Norton was also a Mason.

Brother Brant passed to the Grand Lodge Above in 1807. On his death bed, Brant passed his chieftainship to John Norton, his adopted son. Norton, as a principal chief of the Mohawk nation, would later become a key figure in the War of 1812.

The second important group of First Nations were the Shawnee and other related Nations, known at that time as the “Western Indians.” These people lived in the Michigan and Ohio Indian Territories of the new United States, and were led by Chief Tecumseh and his brother the Prophet. Tecumseh and his brother attempted in the early 1800 era to organize a confederacy of all First Nations in the Territories to resist American settlement on Indian lands. In this work, they received British Indian Department support and encouragement from the British post at Fort Malden in Amherstburg, located on the Detroit River, south of modern day Windsor.

It is widely believed that Chief Tecumseh was a Mason, although exact details of his Masonic affiliation have been lost. However, we do know that when he travelled to Fort Malden to meet with Indian Department officials, he often visited Adoniram Lodge in Amherstburg. Captain Fox, a member of Adoniram Lodge and an officer in the local Amherstburg Militia, told his son stories of the War of 1812. Captain Fox recalled that Tecumseh “frequently met with the Brethren and sat in old Adoniram Lodge, and that the old chief had a great deal of reverence for Masonic work.”

Tecumseh’s pipe tomahawk survives in excellent condition in the collection of the Smithsonian Institute in Washington. On one side an engraved inscription reads “Presented to Chief Tecumseh by Colonel Procter, 41st Regiment, 1812.” On the other side, are engraved 4 significant Masonic symbols, which you will no doubt recognize. They include, the dove – the messenger, the sun – the glory of the Lord, the moon – to rule the night, and the 7 stars that gleam in the Heavens. In fact many of the pipe tomahawks surviving in museum collections today bear these same 4 Masonic engravings.

Death of Tecumseh:

1813 was also a hard year for the British on the Detroit frontier. The British naval forces on Lake Erie were totally defeated by the American Navy at the Battle of Put – in – Bay on September 10.

This defeat meant that the British at Amherstburg were in danger of being outflanked by the Americans who now could sail anywhere on Lake Erie without interference. The British Army, over the strong objections of Tecumseh, decided to evacuate and destroy Fort Malden. Although unhappy over the decision, Tecumseh’s warriors acted as a rear guard defense in case the American Army decided to follow and attack.

In fact the Americans did pursue the British, caught up with them on October 5, and attacked them at Moraviantown, near Chatham. Tecumseh was killed in action as the main British force retreated and escaped. However, the warriors were able to recover Brother Tecumseh’s body and carried it off into the bush, for burial in a secret grave. The location of his final resting place remains unknown to this day.

Battle of Chippewa:

The Americans then advanced along the Canadian side of the Niagara River and encountered the full force of the British at Chippewa, close to Niagara falls, on July 5, 1814. As both sides were determined to succeed and were well trained in military skills, the fighting was intense. The warriors of the Indian Department suffered more casualties in this action than in any other during the War. The American Army was halted, but only briefly.

At one point in the fighting that day, a warrior was about to slay an American who made a Masonic sign of distress. Captain John Clement, a member of the military Lodge of the 8th Kings Regiment, recognized the sign and spared the American. The American prisoner was then placed in a local house to recover from his wounds until he could be returned to his home in Buffalo, New York.

Sometime later, Captain Clement was himself captured and sent as a prisoner to Buffalo. Imagine the surprise when the jailer turned out to be the American soldier that Captain Clement had rescued at Chippewa. In true Masonic tradition, the Captain was turned loose, a horse was provided for his escape, and his safe passage was arranged across the Niagara River, back to British territory.

Battle of Lundy’s Lane:

After Chippewa, the American Army advanced north again and met the British forces at Lundy’s Lane, near Niagara Falls, on July 25. The British were determined to stop them in their tracks while the Americans were just as determined to push past them to regain Newark and Fort George. American and British infantry stood their ground and poured volley after volley into opposing ranks as close as 40 paces away, with field artillery support on both sides, for hours on end, until well after midnight. Both sides were exhausted and withdrew from the field. Sergeant Commins of the 8th Kings recalled the scene the next day.

“The morning light ushered to our view a shocking spectacle, men and horses lying together, Americans and English, occasioned by our advance and retreat.” This was the bloodiest battle of the entire War, with some 700 soldiers on both sides killed in action.

One aspect of the Battle of Lundy’s Lane relevant to our study is a local legend, that was told to me by a Niagara Mason over 40 years ago. This legend states that on the eve of the Battle, the Masons in the British line invited their Masonic counterparts in the American Army to attend a Lodge meeting that was to be held in the field, in a British officer’s marquee tent. The Lodge meeting was apparently held, and of course the next day several Masons on both sides perished in the Battle. No historical documentation supports this legend, but it does reflect the established customs of the time.

For those who may think this legend is just pure fiction, an interesting accidental archaeological find occurred at Lundy’s lane several years after the Battle. A local resident found the Masonic jewel of a Lodge Treasurer, right on the battlefield. This jewel was designed in a distinctly American pattern. While the discovery does not prove that the legendary British – American Lodge meeting ever took place, it does still reinforce the concept of traveling military warrants in both armies.

Attack on Washington:

In August 1814, the British carried the attack to the United States. In retaliation for the
Americans having burned York and Niagara, the British launched an assault on Washington. The Royal Navy carried the invasion force that temporarily drove the American Army out of Washington. The President’s mansion was severely damaged by looting and fire. It was later whitewashed to cover the scars left by the flames. It is known as the “White House” to this day. During the British attack, an American Mason, Francis Scott Keyes, wrote the words to the Star Spangled Banner. He was inspired by watching the British warships bombarding the American shore fortifications with the latest naval artillery. The lyrics of the Star Spangled Banner descriptively record “through the rockets’ red glare and the bombs burst in air, etc.”

Incident at Waterford:

Back in Detroit, we note General Duncan McArthur, one of the American officers who was so cowardly surrendered by General Hull in 1812. He was paroled by the British in 1812, but was soon back in uniform, determined to avenge the American defeat at Detroit. In the summer of 1814, an American Army of some 750 men under his direct command, conducted a raid into what is now Southern Ontario. They were determined to destroy local gristmills, bridges, and any other facilities that could support the British and Canadians.

By November, the Americans had advanced as far as Waterford, a prosperous village in Norfolk County on Nanticoke Creek, that based much of its economy on Brother Morris Sovereen’s fine water powered grist mill. When the news reached Waterford that the Americans were close by, Brother Sovereen, assisted by Brother William Schuyler and his other men, began to hide bags of flour, to keep them out of the hands of the enemy.

General McArthur’s forces entered the village, quickly set fire to Sovereen’s mill and then moved on. They paused for a rest break just outside of the village, but were puzzled to see that there was no smoke coming from the mill. An American officer with six soldiers went back into Waterford to see why the mill was not burning. They caught Brothers Sovereen and Schuyler with buckets in hand, extinguishing the fire with water from the mill pond.

The American officer was so outraged that he ordered his men to hang Brothers Sovereen and Schuyler, from a huge oak tree near the mill. Ropes were quickly produced, and a noose was placed around the neck of each man. When General McArthur rode in to see for himself what was happening, Brother Sovereen, in desperation, made a Masonic sign of distress. Brother General McArthur recognized the sign. The General called out to his very surprised officer, “let them down boys, I’ll spare their lives.” The men were released, but their mill was destroyed.

Fortunately, the pioneer spirit was undefeated in Upper Canada. It is not a coincidence that the Phoenix is a symbol that is venerated by Masons. As you will recall, the Phoenix is a mythical bird that is destroyed by fire, but rises again from its own ashes. Just like the Phoenix, that which was consumed by fire in Upper Canada would also rise again from the ashes of the War. Bitterness would of course remain on both sides of the border for some time to come. However, Masonic fraternal visits between Canadian and American Lodges in subsequent years helped to heal the emotional wounds left in the minds of individual Masons by the War.

A very good example of rebuilding and the Phoenix was the first Lodge building in Upper Canada, located in Newark. It was destroyed during the War, along with the rest of the town.

However, a substantial stone building was erected on the original location in 1817, using some of the rubble from the old town. It was used for a time as a barracks for the Royal Canadian Rifle Regiment, while the local Lodge met elsewhere. In 1860, the Lodge moved into the 1817 reconstruction. Now known as Niagara No. 2, in Niagara on the Lake, the Lodge has met there continuously to this day.

It is also interesting to see what happened to some of the individual veterans of the War in later years. Brother and General Duncan McArthur, of the American Army, who spared the life of Brother Sovreen but not his mill, survived the War. He entered into politics in the State of Ohio, negotiated several peace treaties with the remnants of Tecumseh’s Confederacy, and eventually became the Governor of Ohio. Brother Sovreen, thanks to the General, also survived and was able to rebuild his mill after the War.

Brother and Chief John Norton took part in almost every major battle of the War. He was promoted to the rank of Major in the British Indian Department, and was personally presented with a sword and pair of pistols by the British Commander in Chief, General Prevost, late in 1814. After the War concluded, he was given a life time pension by a grateful colonial government.

A Masonic honour was also bestowed upon him. Merchant’s Lodge no 40 in Quebec presented him with a silver medal, engraved as follows. “To Brother Norton, Captn. and Leader of the Five Nations, from Lodge no 40 at Quebec, as a token of Rembrnc, 1814.” Norton returned home to his much younger wife and his farm on the Grand River. Unfortunately this story did not have a happy ending. Brother Norton had a falling out with a close friend, over the honour of his wife. He challenged the former friend to a duel with pistols and tomahawks, and killed his opponent. Despondent over the tragedy, he decided to leave the Grand River. It is believed that he died somewhere on the Santa Fe Trail, on the way to Oklahoma, trying to find his long lost Cherokee relatives. The location of his grave is unknown.

Brother and Lieutenant James Fitz Gibbon was promoted to the rank of Captain during the War, and remained in Canada as an officer in the Militia. During the 1820’s he was involved in maintaining order on the frontier among Irish labourers involved in building the Rideau Canal. In one memorable occasion in 1824 near the town of Perth, the Irish labourers were on strike and threatened violence. The local magistrate called out the Militia to restore order. Fitz Gibbon walked alone into the construction camp, addressed the men in their native Irish Gaelic, and restored order without any bloodshed. As a proponent of the Masonic brotherhood of man, he was an advocate for the rights of all Irish in Canada; he worked diligently to advance harmony between Roman Catholic Irish immigrants and Protestant Irish immigrants.

During the Rebellion of 1837, he actively supported the Crown, with the military rank of Colonel of Militia. In that role he led detachments of the Upper Canada Militia against the rebel forces who gathered under William Lyon Mackenzie.

At the same time he was also very active in Masonic affairs. In 1822, the Provincial Grand Lodge Assembly at Kingston installed him as Deputy Provincial Grand Master for all of Upper Canada. In this role, he helped to establish many new Lodges in the Province, and worked to advance the concept of an efficient and united Provincial Grand Lodge.

By 1848, he had again advanced his Masonic career when he became a Companion of the York Rite in Toronto at Ionic Chapter. Although records are not clear from this period, it is believed that he may have been a Charter Member of this particular Chapter. Fitz Gibbon eventually returned to England as an elderly military pensioner, and died at the age of 83.

Little Women of 1812 War?

I don’t think so. The women of the War of 1812 were a race of Amazons. The women that were in the camp during the War of 1812 were wives of the soldiers, who were chosen by a lottery system. Only six wives were allowed in camp for every one hundred soldiers.
The women were employed as seamstresses, nurse maids, laundry maids and scullery maids.
It is said that the women were given the hard jobs and the men looked after the dangerous jobs.
The women also had to cook and clean for their own families, the life was very hard and the women were very much respected by the men. If a woman’s husband was killed or died she had three to six months to grieve and then she had to re-marry or leave the camp, most re-married for the security. There are at least two reports of women who married four times in five months because their husbands died.
There were hard times, but also some light times. In Quebec, Anne Prevost, daughter of Governor General George Prevost, writes in her journal entry on January 10th 1812 that, “At 2:00 o’clock walked with Miss Bruyère, Miss Grant and Miss Baley about halfway to the River Charles, which is now hard frozen. We had no gentlemen, nor did we meet with any adventures. Miss Bruyère for fun, took an unloaded pistol wrapt up in her handkerchief.”
She was 17 and the war seemed likely. She writes in her journal dated February 10th 1812 that, “Captain C. returned from the United States. This was the second time my Father had sent him to make observations and judge what probability there was of a War.” Her writing portrays her youth and the enjoyment of her surroundings.
June 8th: Went with my Father and a party of ladies, his Staff, etc., to Lorette, a village of converted Indians, about 9 miles from Quebec. The Indians all paid their respects to the Governor, and danced their War Dance in our presence: the noise they made was terrific:–it was more like the howling of dogs than the human voice.
In a later entry, she describes hearing the news of war for the first time:  June 25th: I was summoned in the midst of my French lesson to hear some news that had arrived. It was indeed an important piece of intelligence:–’America has declared War against England.’ The news had arrived by an Express to some of the Quebec merchants….On this day I saw nothing before me but my Father’s honour and glory. Although I knew how small a force we had to defend the Canadas, such was my confidence in his talents and fortune, that I did not feel the slightest apprehension of any reverse. I thought those abominable Yankees deserved a good drubbing for having dared to think of going to War with England, and surely there was no harm in rejoicing that the War had happened during my Father’s Administration, because I thought he was the person best calculated to inflict on the Yankees the punishment they deserved.
There is no doubt whose side she is on. It is interesting to note that she was only 17 years old when the war began. There are a few journal entries where she tells of her love and her heart, and fondness for her father and of the soldiers in his camp: …Captain Milnes was very prepossessing. He was unbecomingly tall and had an awkward stoop, but his countenance was very intelligent and pleasing; indeed I will not even make one exception when I assert that when Captain M. was in good humour, he was the most agreeable person I ever met with…. I will frankly acknowledge that I could not see so much of his character and receive so much pleasing attention from him, without feeling my heart in some danger…. I resolved to be on my guard and to ‘keep my heart with all diligence’ till it was really sought. Had he tried to gain my affection he probably would have succeeded… (December 6th 1812)
Being a general’s daughter, Miss Prevost also shows pride in her country and the Canadian side. On June 3rd 1813 she describes an attack on Sackett Harbor: We heard that an attack has been made on Sackett’s Harbour. My Father was there, and as much exposed to danger as any common soldier. Thanks be to the Almighty he is safe! The attack was made with only 800 men, and the American prisoners say their force was 3000. We were not altogether unsuccessful–we drove the enemy to their block houses–blew up a magazine, caused them to set fire to some valuable stores–took 3, 6 pounders and 150 prisoners, and then retreated to our ships. It was found impossible to take their forts without Artillery, which we had not with us–relying on the co-operation of the Navy which was prevented by an adverse wind. To this circumstance is attributed the failure of the expedition.
The war took on different meaning for everyone involved. Some had their worst fears realized, and some, like Miss. Anne Prevost, were either too young or too detached to be worried about its consequences. Throughout their journals and letters, however, they describe a different take on the war than many of the reports given by soldiers and officers. There is the hope of love and the fear of its loss. There are descriptions of the weather and the landscape. And there is great pride in their own respective countries and the sides they were on.
After the war, Anne Prevost would have a difficult time. Her father died, her mother died soon after, then her brother and sister also. Anne spent the rest of her days, “a spinster finding her solace in the One who made all life.”
It is very interesting to note that almost all of the diaries and letters that tell of the war are written by upper class ladies. Officers’ wives and daughters were often literate whereas the regular soldiers’ wives usually were not. There are few journals written from the laundress’ point of view, so most accounts are from others’ observations. Most often the letters and journals kept by these ladies included details not mentioned in soldiers’ or officers’ journals. They wrote about the weather, their travels, the bonding with the other women in camp and their husbands’ doings.
Some on the British side told their stories as well. In a letter to her cousin Charles, Alicia Cockburn, wife of a senior officer, tells of life in Montreal in 1814, at a camp in Upper Canada. She tells of the weather saying, “The Summer is very fine, and not so overpowering from heat as last year, but it is hot enough, and will be considerably more so….” She also makes a mention of the training of the British soldiers in the camp that was next to the one that her husband and herself were in. In the camp, there were “– Brigadiers – Grenadiers – & Fuzileers – Right – Left– here – there – march – halt – wheel – double-quick – tumble down –tumble up –fire away – thus they keep moving…” Alicia sees some humour in this as well, because in continuing her description of the scene before, she continues “…and a most moving scene it is, but I think if I commanded, I would move it a little nearer the enemy.”
In an earlier portion of her letter, she makes mention of her travels to the United States, stating that:
I am at present meditating a Journey to Upper Canada, and even a trip into the United States in a Flag of Truce, which to do the Yankees justice they treat with uncommon civility especially when born by Ladies, whom they allow to go much farther, and peep about much more, than we should do in a similar case, whatever might be their beauty and accomplishments.
It is interesting that in her letter she mentions the weather and her trip to the United States and the soldiers’ activities, but she does not ever mention the conflicts of the war around her.

Slaves Help Defend Birthing Nation A company of freed black slaves fought for Britain at Queenston Heights, Ont., in the War of 1812.  Lord Simcoe, from which the town of Simcoe gets its name, was determined to cleanse the colony of a great evil – slavery. Before assuming the office of lieutenant governor of Upper Canada, he declared:
“The principles of the British Constitution do not admit of that slavery which Christianity condemns. The moment I assume the Government of Upper Canada under no modification will I assent to a law that discriminates by dishonest policy between natives of Africa, America or Europe.”
Discussions regarding the abolition of slavery were taking place in England around the end of the 18th century. The subject generated a good deal of interest and in 1791 it was debated in the British parliament. Simcoe, a member of parliament, was among those who spoke against it. He recognized the immorality of slavery, denounced it as an offence against Christianity and strongly supported efforts to prohibit the continued importation of slaves into the country. Simcoe was determined to end slavery in his “dream province” and if he had had his way it would have been banned outright. Political realities in Upper Canada intervened to prevent this from happening. Simcoe discovered to his dismay that he would have to settle instead for its gradual abolition.
The slavery of African-Canadians and Aborigines in Canada had existed since the beginning of European settlement. French settlers in the area of Windsor had used slave labour since 1749. By 1792 the number of enslaved people in Upper Canada was not large but when compared to the number of free settlers it was not insignificant. In 1799 there were 15 African-Canadians living in York and another ten living east of the Don River. Six were owned by William Jarvis and six worked for Peter Russell whose slaves included a woman, her free husband and their four children. There were some 1000 slaves in Quebec. Among the African-American Loyalists who came to the Shelburne area of Nova Scotia, 42% of them had seen action in the revolution whereas only 31% of the whites had fought. In Upper Canada the main influx of slaves came in the 1780s with the arrival of Loyalist refugees some of whom brought their slave servants.
In 1790 an act of the Imperial Parliament (the name of the British parliament when it dealt with colonial matters) encouraged emigration from Britain to Canada and assured prospective emigrants that their slaves would remain their property. During the American Revolution British officers encouraged freed slaves in the south to come north and join the Loyalist forces. It was hoped that if enough African-Americans left the south the economy would suffer and so further the Loyalist cause.

tim aa

Among Loyalists there were a number of African-American veterans, individuals who had escaped from slavery and accepted Britain’s offer of emancipation in return for military service against the rebels. Many responded to advertisements addressed to Heroes like the above. One of these men was Richard Pierpoint. Pierpoint was born in Bondu, Senegal in 1744. In 1760 he was captured as a slave and taken to New York where he was bought by a member of the Pierpoint family of Connecticut. When the American Revolution broke out the British government offered freedom to slaves willing to enlist to fight the rebels. Richard escaped and joined Butler’s Rangers, a commando-type unit that was expert in guerrilla warfare. When the war ended with Britain’s defeat Sir Guy Carleton was asked by the American victors to return all slaves to their rightful owners. Carleton refused and these African-Americans joined the exodus from the 13 Colonies and became African-Canadian Loyalists.
Richard moved to Canada along with other members of the Rangers who were given land near Fort Niagara. When war broke out in 1812 Richard, who was 60, sent a letter to the government asking that an all-African company of soldiers be formed. This was done and Richard fought bravely in a number of important battles including Queenston Heights. Pierpoint received a land ticket in 1822 and his plot was located in Garafraxa on the Grand River, near the town of Fergus about 100 km northwest of Toronto. Some old friends from Butler’s Rangers also moved here, including a few other African-Canadian families. Richard lived in Garafraxa until his death around 1838 when he was 94 years old.
Upper Canada’s African-Canadian population was a mixture of free veterans who were granted land for their military services and a larger number of slaves who were without rights and freedom. The initiative taken to change this came from an African-Canadian named Peter Martin. Little is known of Martin other than that he worked for Colonel John Butler and was chosen by the African-Canadian residents of the colony to speak on their behalf to the Executive Council.
On Wednesday, March 21st, 1793 Peter Martin appeared before members of the Executive Council. Present were Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe, Chief Justice William Osgoode and Hon. Peter Russell, a prominent citizen who owned slaves. Martin informed the Council that a violent outrage had occurred to an African-Canadian woman named Chloe Cooley who worked for him. According to Martin a resident of Queenston named William Vrooman, Chloe’s master, decided to sell Chloe to someone in New York state. When she resisted leaving the province Vrooman forcibly transported her across the Niagara River to her new owner. Martin said he knew of another person who had suffered a similar fate and he reported hearing that several other slave owners in the area intended doing the same thing with their slaves. A concerned Simcoe resolved that steps would be taken immediately to prevent further acts of this nature. Council directed the attorney general to prosecute the man who had sold Chloe Cooley, however, both Simcoe and his Attorney General, John White, knew that under the existing law Vrooman was acting within his rights and little that could be done.
Simcoe decided to act to rid the colony of this great evil. While Simcoe’s loyal supporter in the Assembly, Attorney-General John White, piloted the government-sponsored legislation through the legislature, Simcoe was the driving force behind it. He was the only person in the colony with the authority to initiate such legislation. White introduced the bill in the second session of the first Parliament, which opened in Newark on Friday, May 31st, 1793.
Chapter VII was titled  “An Act to prevent the further introduction of Slaves and to limit the term of contracts for servitude within this Province.” Its Preamble read: “Whereas it is unjust that a people who enjoy freedom by law should encourage the introduction of Slaves and whereas it is highly expedient to abolish Slavery in this Province “so far as the same may gradually be done without violating private property.” Simcoe’s noble intent had to be partially nullified by adding the qualification that recognized the realities of the colony for the bill to eliminate slavery in Upper Canada faced determined resistance.
Attorney General White reported that there was “much opposition but little argument” to his bill. This suggested that the real debate on the bill took place before it was ever introduced in the legislature. Slavery was closely associated with some of the ruling class in the pioneer province for a number of Simcoe’s earliest advisers were prominent slave owners. Among them were Peter Russell, Alexander Grant, James Baby, Richard Cartwright and Robert Hamilton as well as a wide cross-section of leading Loyalist families stretching from Detroit through the Niagara peninsula and along the St. Lawrence River.
Nine members of the Legislative Council, some of whom were also Executive Councillors, were slave owners or members of slave-owning families. Four of the original sixteen members of the Legislative Assembly were slave owners: John McDonell, Hazelton Spencer, Peter Van Alstine and David William Smith. Another slave owner, Hannah Jarvis, wife of the provincial secretary, William Jarvis, was highly critical of the legislation and very critical of Simcoe, who,

“by a piece of chicanery has freed all the Negroes by which he has rendered himself unpopular along with White, the member for Kingston, who will never come in again (that is, be re-elected) as a representative.” Despite her assertion that Simcoe had “freed all the Negroes,” Hannah knew very well that not one slave had been freed by the legislation.
Hard labour was required to clear land on the frontier and some settlers considered slaves to be their most valuable asset. A number of them had been purchased during the Revolutionary War from Native warriors who captured them on forays into American territory. Slaves were highly valued given the arduous conditions of work and the scarcity of labour. Slavery was defended by owners and would-be owners who cited the Bible as the ultimate source for their certainty. “Canaan, the lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers.” While some legislators agreed that legislative action was necessary to prevent the importation of more slaves into the province, they wanted it postponed for several years. Simcoe was adamant for abolition and finally a compromise was reached.
Following Chief Justice William Osgoode’s charge to a grand jury that slavery ought not to exist in the colony of Canada the Legislature of Upper Canada took action and passed the bill which was given royal assent on the 9th of July, 1793. The Upper Canadian legislation repealed for Upper Canada that part of the Imperial Act, 30 Geo. III, Ch. 27 which permitted the importation of slaves into Upper Canada. Under Upper Canada’s legislation no new slaves were to be brought into the province and the term of contract under which existing slaves could be bound was limited to nine years unless they were freed earlier by their masters. Children of slaves were to be freed when they reached the age of twenty-five. Until that time they were to remain with their mothers.
One member of the Assembly, David William Smith, was critical of parts of the legislation and conveyed his frustration to a friend on the 20th of June, 1793:

“We have made no law to free the Slaves – all those who have been brought into the Province or purchased under authority legally exercised are slaves to all intents and purposes. The Assembly Members are, however determined to have an act about slaves part of which I think is well enough. Another part is most iniquitous and I wash my hands of it. If a free man who is married to a slave has children his children by this marriage would be declared slaves. Fye, fye. The Laws of God and man cannot authorize it.” Smith considered it intolerable that the legislation would result in the heir of a free man and a slave woman being considered a slave.
In his address to the Assembly Simcoe praised the act as a “singular pleasure that such persons as may be in that unhappy condition which sound policy unites to condemn, added to their own protection from all undue severity.. . may henceforth look forward with certainty to the emancipation of their offspring.”In a report to Henry Dundas dated 16 Sept. 1793 Simcoe commented on the difficulty he encountered in getting the bill approved.

“The greatest resistance was to the Slave Bill many plausible arguments being given like the dearness of Labour and the difficulty of obtaining servants to cultivate Lands. The matter was finally settled by undertaking to secure the slaves already obtained upon condition that an immediate stop should be put to the importation of more slaves and that slavery should be gradually abolished.”
The second section of the Act provided that “Nothing in the Act should extend or be construed to extend to liberate any negro or other person subject to slave service or to discharge them or any of them from the possession of the owner thereof who shall have come or been brought into this Province in conformity to the conditions prescribed by any authority for that purpose exercised or by an ordinance or law of the Province of Quebec or by proclamation of any of his Majesty’s governors of the said province for the time being or of any Act of Parliament of Great Britain or shall have otherwise come into the possession of any person by gift, bequest or bona fide purchase, before the passing of this Act whose property therein is hereby confirmed.”
When Peter Russell, a former president and administrator of the province, advertised one of his slaves for sale he was severely criticized by a number of people. Others defended Russell.
In Their own Words “Not only was the President not violating any law existing at that time in the transaction of the sale of his negro slaves, but if his advertisement received a response and an actual sale was made it can in no way be made to sully his fame as administrator as the sale, if made, was not till several years after he had ceased to be administrator of this province.” The Slavery Act of 1793 was a compromise that ended slavery gradually in Upper Canada. Denmark was the first country to strike down the slave trade on May 6th, 1792. Upper Canada followed in 1793 making this remote, little-known British legislature on the edge of the wilderness the first of all British colonies to take such action and years before Britain did so  The end of slavery was hastened by the overwhelming loyalty of African-Canadian residents during the War of 1812 when they served with distinction throughout the war. “At least 40” of the 140 volunteers fought under Sheaffe at the successful assault at the Battle of Queenston Heights.
Britain outlawed the slave trade in 1807. In 1833 the newly elected British parliament contained 104 members who had pledged on the hustings to abolish slavery. On August 23rd, 1833 the Imperial Parliament passed an act to abolish slavery throughout the empire effective August 1st, 1834. The Imperial Act of 1833 abolished slavery in the British Empire effective August, 1834. This Act made no mention of Upper Canada because the Imperial government believed that slavery had already been eliminated from the province many years before. By the time Imperial emancipation finally did occur there were few if any slaves left in Upper Canada.
Thanks to Simcoe and the little legislature in the heart of North America, it could be said of Canada as of England:
“Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs Receive our air, that moment they are free; They touch our country and their shackles fall off.” History is the progress of the consciousness of freedom; it is not the truth and the light, but the striving for it.
Gunboat Diplomacy in 1812
Early nineteenth century gunboats were modest shallow-draft boats that carried ordnance (cannon) and had a well-armed crew. They could be manoeuvred in shallow or restricted waters where sailing was difficult for larger ships – ideal for the St. Lawrence River!
Gunboats were built in a range of dimensions, had one or two masts and were rigged (the configuration of masts and sails) in a variety of ways, for example, with square or trapezoidal sails. There was no set or definitive typology for gunboats during the era of the War of 1812. The term “gunboat” was used loosely in the navy and often referred to any vessel carrying one or more pieces of artillery.
Sometimes boats, especially merchant vessels, were retrofitted to be made into gunboats simply by mounting one or more pieces of artillery, which was a common practice during the War of 1812.
Naval historian Robert Malcomson writes in Warships of the Great Lakes that a gunboat is: “a small armed vessel, varying considerably in size, rig and strength from a bateau fitted with a carronade or small-calibre long gun, to a purpose-built craft with rowing benches and two or three guns on slides or circles, to converted merchantmen outfitted with one or more pieces of heavy ordnance.” Employed by the British and American Navy, gunboats assumed both offensive and defensive roles during the War of 1812 including supporting amphibious attacks and protecting supply convoys. During the war, gunboats served on all marine fronts including along the Atlantic coast as well as on the Great Lakes, Lake Champlain and the St. Lawrence River.
Throughout the War of 1812, gunboats played several key roles around the St. Lawrence from protecting and escorting convoys of bateaux loaded with precious military equipment and supplies, to aiding in battle and protecting the fluvial border between British North America and the United States.
Throughout the War of 1812, many gunboats as well as large warships were constructed at the Kingston Naval Yard, an important British warships building facility on Lake Ontario.
In the shallow waters of Brown’s Bay along the St. Lawrence River just east of Mallorytown Landing, Ontario lay the remains of a nineteenth century hull. Although known to the local community for years, it was not until the mid-1960s that Parks Canada Agency’s Underwater Archaeological Service examined the hull. This initial testing suggested that the vessel was a probable War of 1812 era British gunboat.
In 1966, Parks Canada excavated the gunboat wreckage. Although the upper portion of the vessel had been lost, either to salvaging or seasonal weather conditions such as ice flows, the hull of the gunboat was largely intact. After raising the gunboat remains, Parks Canada staff worked to preserve the wooden hull from further deterioration, and the vessel was put on display at St. Lawrence Islands National Park at Mallorytown Landing.
Identifying the origins of this Brown’s Bay vessel has proved to be a challenge, both from an archaeological and historical point of view. Objects found in association with the wreck do not positively identify the wreckage, nor do registers and newspaper accounts of private vessel shipwrecks from 1800 to 1870. Naval records, however, showed that the dimensions of the Radcliffe, a British gunboat completed at the Kingston Navy Yard on March 31, 1817, were almost identical to those of the Brown’s Bay remains. These similar dimensions as well as the presence of a British broad arrow, a mark of British government property, found on one of the vessel’s components suggest the wreck had a naval origin.
In 1986, Parks Canada underwater archaeologist Chris Amer conducted a study on the gunboat remains. Based on the analysis, it is believed that the vessel underwent significant alterations during its active use, the results of which obliterated much of its original appearance. Judging by the hull’s materials and the techniques used in its construction and retrofit, it is believed that the vessel was converted from military to commercial use sometime after 1820, and this conversion could account for the addition of features not typical for a gunboat.
This craft’s exceptionally long career, first as a naval vessel intended for border defence, then as a commercial craft, attests to the changing nature of life along the frontier. The hostilities it was built to counter gave way to growing industry, trade and commerce. Its conversion from vessel of war to vessel of trade reinforces the growing significance of commerce and development on the St. Lawrence throughout the nineteenth century.
The gunboat was found 300 feet (90 metres) from shore in approximately six feet (2 metres) of water. The gunboat is a wooden-hulled boat possessing an overall length of 54 feet, 2 inches. It is believed that this wreck began its career as a vessel of war before being converted to serve a commercial function. The excavation and preservation of the wreck was of international significance in the development of underwater archaeology as a discipline set the standards for future projects by Parks Canada’s Underwater Archaeology Service.
Historic objects discovered with the wreck include bolts with the British broad arrow, a pewter plate, comb, cast-iron stove door, leather boot, two shovels, forks and clay pipe fragments.
Prescott was a significant naval port for gunboats used in coastal defence. During of the War of 1812, Prescott kept a fleet of gunboats to patrol and guard the river between there and Kingston.
During the War of 1812, protection of the St. Lawrence River was one of the foremost concerns of British naval and army officers. While the section of the St. Lawrence bordering the U.S. was always vulnerable to interception, the stretch of river between Prescott and Kingston was particularly susceptible to attack owing to the numerous inlets of the Thousand Islands which provided the perfect cover for bands of marauders stalking travelling bateaux brigades. Prescott’s Fort Wellington, constructed during the War of 1812, was one aspect of border defence. Another layer of security came from the use of gunboats to defend the river and Prescott became an important naval staging area where these vessels were stationed throughout much of the war.
Moreover, Prescott’s location was an advantage for the safety of boats and crew upon the exposed maritime route. The town was well situated to offer rapid assistance to those in difficulty along the St. Lawrence between the Long Sault Rapids to the east and the Thousand Islands to the west. Additionally, the advantage of promptly responding to enemy incursions on the river meant that the British could be in a better position to protect their essential communication route and therefore their interests in Upper Canada.

war 1812  5
Excavating the gunboat wreckage (1966)
© Parks Canada
Burning Washington

The War of 1812 continued into 1814. In September of that year, the British sailed up the Chesapeake and marched on Washington, DC. They met very little resistance as they entered the US Capitol. The then unopposed British set fire to several Federal buildings including the White House! While the fires still raged, suddenly a hurricane passed over the Capitol and some claim to have even seen a tornado come down Pennsylvania Avenue towards the British! Not only was the White House fire and others put out by this great storm, the incredibly strong winds reportedly tossed British cannons into the air! When the storm was over, the British regulars and officers were so spooked by what had just happened, that they retreated – unopposed – to their ships and sailed off.

A legend emerged that during the rebuilding of the structure, white paint was applied to mask the burn damage it had suffered, giving the building its namesake hue. This is unfounded, as the building had been painted white since its construction in 1798. Of the numerous spoils taken from the White House when it was ransacked by British troops, only two have been recovered—a painting of George Washington, rescued by then-first lady Dolley Madison, and a jewelry box returned to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in 1939, by a Canadian man who said his grandfather had taken it from Washington. Most of the spoils were lost when a convoy of British ships led by HMS Fantome sank en route to Halifax off Prospect during a storm on the night of November 24, 1814.
Now, not long before the war was over, Washington DC was in big trouble. On August 24, 1814, soldiers were racing alongside the civilians out of town in a panic. The British had landed 8 days prior with some 4000 battle-hardened troops who had seen plenty of action in the wars with Napoleon. The Americans were not experienced, not well trained and not well led. The President of the United States, James Madison came galloping through on a horse shouting “Clear Out! Clear Out!” When the Commander-In-Chief is telling everyone to haul-ass, then everyone listens. One of America’s proudest moments. Before his wife, Dolley Madison, left she grabbed a bunch of paintings including Gilbert Stuart’s famous painting of George Washington.  It’s a good thing she did because, as it turns out, Dolley Madison is credited with saving valuable artifacts of the nation.

war 1812  6

Maj. Gen. Robert Ross Led The Men Into Washington and Led Them in a Hasty Retreat In the Face America’s Secret Weapon
The Redcoats came marching into Washington expecting a defense. Instead, they faced but a single volley of musket fire. But, it was enough to get their attention because it killed one guy, wounded three others and took out the horse from under the commanding general. The Brits moved on to the Capitol, where again they expected a last stand. So, they fired a few rockets through the windows and storm trooper busted down the doors only to find the chirping of crickets. So, they set the place on fire. Then they set the White House on fire as well as the Treasury building. Major General Robert Ross, the commander, stopped by the newspaper National Intelligencer to pick up the scribe’s final paper that assured the residents that the city was safe. Yup…the press was right on that story and have been as accurate ever since. Anyway, Ross couldn’t get the paper into his pocket as a souvenir because he had already filled his pockets with some of Madison’s personal papers. The general shouted, “Damn It! My pocket is full of old Madison’s love letters!” That’s what he gets for looting.

war 1812  7

Bill Thornton Saved the Patent Office
On August 25, 1814, a single maniac named John Lewis came charging at the British Army. He was the grandnephew of George Washington and it seems he was upset over his impressment into the Royal Navy. So, he went on a revenge binge only to get himself shot to death. There was another, more successful defender though. Dr. William Thornton ran the Patent Office and just as the soldiers were set to torch the building, he told the perpetrators that they would be no better than the barbarians who had put ablaze the Ancient Library of Alexandria. I suppose in shame, the Redcoats backed off and the Patent Office was saved. Then, Divine Providence showed up.

Not Long After the British Burned the White House, a Hurricane Doused the Flames and Forced the Redcoats Backed to their Ships
The British tried to set fire to 150 barrels of gunpowder at an abandoned American fort. The nitwits ended up setting off the whole kit and kaboodle at once and killed 30 of their own men while wounding another 44. Seems these guys were their own worst enemy. Then the wind picked up and the rain started to fall in buckets. Just in the nick of time, on this date in 1814,  before the entire city was burned to the ground, a hurricane showed up. The fires were put out and Ross ordered a full scale retreat back to their ships. The British never returned and Washington DC was saved from total destruction by this so-called “Hurricane of Providence.”   Most accounts of the burning of Washington, such as the New World Encyclopedia, mention the hurricane in passing but do suggest that the rain from the tropical cyclone did put out the fires in the public buildings.  Now, just because the British evacuated Washington DC doesn’t mean that they were done. Somehow their ships were spared the wrath of the hurricane because less than a month later, they attempted to invade Baltimore but they were not able to fully penetrate the city’s defense or destroy Fort McHenry that guarded Baltimore Harbor. It was during the bombardment of Fort McHenry that Francis Scott Key was inspired to write the words to what became known as the Star Spangled Banner. And guess who was also involved in that attack? Why none other than Maj. Gen. Robert Ross was a key figure in the adventure of Francis Scott Key during the Battle of Baltimore. So, without the Hurricane of Providence, maybe there would not have been a Star Spangled Banner. But, this national intervention of Divinity didn’t save everything. While the city was saved, the Patent Office that Dr. Thornton so skillfully saved wasn’t as lucky. The roof blew off. Perhaps Dr. Thornton missed church that week.
Regardless of the Congressional declaration, the country was ill prepared and not well motivated for war. The army quickly attempted three invasions of Canada during 1812 but they all failed. In April 1813 the Navy took control of the Great Lakes and U.S. troops captured and burned York (Toronto), Canada. In September the Navy fought the Battle of Lake Erie at Put-In-Bay as Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry repulsed a British naval attack.
The invasion at Chesapeake Bay was the most successful as British troops burned Norfolk then entered Washington, D.C. and burned many buildings including the capitol and the White House. President Madison and Congress fled to be with the military but First Lady Dolley Madison, a North Carolina native, stayed behind and saved priceless artefacts before the White House was torched. In a letter from the First Lady to her sister, Anna, written the day before, she describes the abandonment of the White House and her own famous action of saving Gilbert Stuart’s priceless portrait of George Washington. As Mrs. Madison fled, she rendezvoused with her husband and together from a safe distance they watched the city burn.
“My husband left me yesterday morning to join General Winder. He inquired anxiously whether I had courage or firmness to remain in the President’s house until his return on the morrow, or succeeding day, and on my assurance that I had no fear but for him, and the success of our army, he left, beseeching me to take care of myself, and of the Cabinet papers, public and private. I have since received two dispatches from him, written with a pencil. The last is alarming, because he desires I should be ready at a moment’s warning to enter my carriage, and leave the city; that the enemy seemed stronger than had at first been reported, and it might happen that they would reach the city with the intention of destroying it. I am accordingly ready; I have pressed as many Cabinet papers into trunks as to fill one carriage; our private property must be sacrificed, as it is impossible to procure wagons for its transportation. I am determined not to go myself until I see Mr. Madison safe, so that he can accompany me, as I hear of much hostility towards him. Disaffection stalks around us. My friends and acquaintances are all gone, even Colonel C. with his hundred, who were stationed as a guard in this enclosure. French John (a faithful servant), with his usual activity and resolution, offers to spike the cannon at the gate, and lay a train of powder, which would blow up the British, should they enter the house. To the last proposition I positively object, without being able to make him understand why all advantages in war may not be taken.
“Wednesday Morning, twelve o’clock. — Since sunrise I have been turning my spy-glass in every direction, and watching with unwearied anxiety, hoping to discover the approach of my dear husband and his friends; but, alas! I can descry only groups of military, wandering in all directions, as if there was a lack of arms, or of spirit to fight for their own fireside.
“Three o’clock. — Will you believe it, my sister? We have had a battle, or skirmish, near Bladensburg, and here I am still, within sound of the cannon! Mr. Madison comes not. May God protect us! Two messengers, covered with dust, come to bid me fly; but here I mean to wait for him… At this late hour a wagon has been procured, and I have had it filled with plate and the most valuable portable articles, belonging to the house. Whether it will reach its destination, the “Bank of Maryland,” or fall into the hands of British soldiery, events must determine. Our kind friend, Mr. Carroll, has come to hasten my departure, and in a very bad humor with me, because I insist on waiting until the large picture of General Washington is secured, and it requires to be unscrewed from the wall. This process was found too tedious for these perilous moments; I have ordered the frame to be broken, and the canvas taken out. It is done! and the precious portrait placed in the hands of two gentlemen of New York, for safe keeping. And now, dear sister, I must leave this house, or the retreating army will make me a prisoner in it by filling up the road I am directed to take. When I shall again write to you, or where I shall be to-morrow, I cannot tell!”
The “plate and the most valuable portable articles, belonging to the house” plus the portrait of Washington were all saved thanks entirely to the perseverance and bravery of Dolley Madison.
A few days later the British were turned back at Baltimore harbor.
On December 15, 1814, a group of Northeast Federalist met at the Hartford Convention in Connecticut to discuss secession — and — to propose 7 Constitutional amendments to protect the influence of Northeast states. This is commonly known as “confusion.”
On December 24, 1814, at a British and American diplomats meeting in Belgium, the two sides signed the Treaty of Ghent to end the fighting. They agreed on a status quo ante bellum… Just stop fighting and each go their own way. But no one thought to mention the treaty to Andrew Jackson. The general had taken his army down to New Orleans to thwart the British invasion at the mouth of the Mississippi. Arriving in early January, 1815, he considered the situation and agreed to accept an offer from the French pirate Jean Lafitte to join forces against the British. Lafitte supplied the naval power as Jackson met the Redcoats by land. On Jan. 8, the Battle of New Orleans was short but decisive as the British officially suffered 700 killed and 1400 wounded. Jackson’s forces had casualties of 8 killed and 13 wounded.
On January 19, 1815, still unaware that the war was over, Jackson sent a letter to the Secretary of War in which he said,
“His loss on this ground, since the debarkation of his troops, as stated by the last prisoners and deserters, and as confirmed by many additional circumstances, must have exceeded four thousand…”
By return dispatch Jackson was notified of the treaty and finally the war ended.

BATTLE OF LUNDY’S LANE

“History in some sense is always propaganda.”
Today the sloping site of the bloodiest battle in the War of 1812 is a church grave yard and an elementary school appropriately named Battlefield Elementary School. Occupying the crest of the rise is Drummund Hill Presbyterian Church. Peace and quiet – except during recess – permeate the place made sacred by the blood of British and American soldiers intent on holding the heights that sultry summer evening one hundred and ninety two years ago. The battle like the war that neither side won is claimed as a victory by both combatants.
President James Madison, whose public career was a series of contradictions, compromises, doubts and fears, started it all by declaring war on Great Britain on June 18, 1812. In a subsequent proclamation to the nation Madison exhorted the good people of the United States to “exert themselves in supporting and invigorating all the measures which may be adopted by the constituted authorities for obtaining a speedy, a just and an honourable peace.”
Over two years later on September 20, 1814 in his Sixth Annual Message to Congress, Madison voiced his rather embellished version of events on the Niagara Peninsula. “On our side we can appeal to a series of achievements which have given new lustre to the American arms. Besides brilliant incidents in the minor operations of the campaign, the splendid victories gained on the Canadian side of the Niagara by the American forces under Major-General Brown and Brigadiers Scott and Gaines have gained for these heroes and their emulating companions the most unfading laurels and having triumphantly tested the progressive discipline of the American soldiery have taught the enemy that the longer he protracts his hostile efforts, the more certain and decisive will be his final discomfiture.”
Prelude to the Battle of Lundy’s Lane
On May 25th, 1813 ships in the Niagara River commanded by Oliver Hazard Perry along with the newly constructed batteries at Fort Niagaara began bombarding Fort George. The flimsy fort was not the object of their cannonade which was directed at the garrison therein commanded by Brigadier General John Vincent.

Fort George from Fort Niagara

war 1812  8
Two days later an American force numbering some 5000 led by Colonel Winfield Scott stormed ashore at Two Mile Creek. Vincent, who was only too conscious of the limitations of his own forces, ordered the guns spiked, the ammunition destroyed and the fort evacuated. The British retreated westward to Beaver Dams on the escarpment where Vincent summoned British forces stationed at Fort Erie, Queenston and Chippawa to join him. Later Vincent, who was promoted to major general on June 4th, withdrew to Burlington Bay, a strong position high above the lake with easy access to a harbour and land routes to both York and Amherstburg. The Americans now controlled the whole of the Niagara frontier.

war 1812  9

British Major General [See Below * ]
Following Vincent an American force bivouacked for the night at Stoney Creek where they were surprised and defeated in a night attack. This was a decisive victory for it stopped the American advance into the Niagara Peninsula. The remaining Americans set fire to Fort Erie, withdrew from it and Chippawa and retreated to the corner of the peninsula around Queenston and Fort George. A second attempt was made to penetrate Vincent’s defenses when some 500 Americans under Colonel Boerstler left Queenston on June 23rd to capture the British post at De Cew’s house commanded by Lieutenant James Fitzgibbon.

British Lieutenant

war 1812 10
Learning of Boerstler’s plans, Laura Secord set out to inform Fitzgibbon about the enemy force advancing to attack the stone house in which he was quartered which she succeeded in doing at 7 o’clock on the 24th of June. Shortly thereafter Fitzgibbon on hearing cannon and musketry fire rode out to reconoitre. He found the enemy engaged in combat with some 300 warriors from Lower Canada and a hundred Mohawks led by Captains William Kerr and John Brant. They were harrassing the foe’s flank and rear and “galling him severely.” Enraged by the loss of their brethen the warriors fought savagely.Their horrific hooting and hollering terrified the Americans who were desperately fighting a fiercesome, phantom-like foe they could scarcely see. Hemmed in by a swamp on one side and the Natives on the other, Boerstler gratefully grabbed at Fitzgibbon’s presence and surrendered to him and his 50 49ers. The victory belonged to the Aborignals and Fitzbibbon acknowledged this when he later recorded, “… not a shot was fired on our side by any but the Indians. They beat the American detachment into a state of terror.” Despite Fitzgibbon’s acknowledgement there were some who believed the British officer exaggerated his own involvement. John Norton uttered the classic statement, ” The Cognauaga [* *]Indians fought the battle, the Mohawks got the plunder and Fitzgibbon got the praise.”
This victory resulted in an impasse. The American forces were concentrated at Fort George unable to break out, while British and Canadian forces round about them were unable to break in. Both settled down and awaited the outcome of conflicts elsewhere. These required heavy reinforcements which reduced the regular American troops available along the Niagara frontier. By December British troops had retaken most of the frontier with the exception of Fort George occupied by Brigadier General George McClure and a few hundred state militiamen who were reaching the end of their term of service and pressing to return to their homes in New York. On hearing that British Colonel John Murray was advancing against the fort, McClure decided to abandon it. Before doing so he issued his infamous order to torch the houses roundabout in the dead of winter. “Nothing but heaps of coals and streets full of furniture the inhabitants were fortunate enough to get out of their houses met the eye in all directions.” Four hundred men, women and children were rendered homeless in bitter winter weather. This was another barbarism in a barbarous war.
The British had quick revenge. Lieutenant General Gordon Drummond had arrived at Upper Canada in August of 1813 to assume responsibility for the administration of the province and to take command the British forces stationed there. He was accompanied by Major General Phineas Riall, the replacement for Vincent who had been given command of the garrison at Kingston. On arrival at Fort George on December 16, Drummond was greeted by a pathetic populous and demands for retribution. He heard and immediately ordered Murray to attack Fort Niagara which fell quickly and yielded a great quantity of ammunition and supplies including a thousand pairs of shoes.
Shortly thereafter Riall with a force of regulars and warriors crossed the river and encountering virtually no opposition, captured Lewiston whose guns threatened Queenston. After destroying Lewiston Riall proceeded to raid Youngstown and a Tuscarora village leaving both in charred ruins before returning to Fort George. Intent on ensuring the complete elimination of any threat to the Niagara frontier, Drummond ordered Riall to re-cross the Niagara River which he did at Chippawa on December 29th. He burned Buffalo and Black Rock in order in Drummond’s words, “to deprive the enemy of the cover which these places afford.” The raid was a total success and within the three-week period the situation had been reversed: the British had secured possession of the frontier. Lamented one American commander to the Governor of New York, “The flourishing village of Buffalo is laid in ruins and the Niagara frontier now lies open and naked to our enemies.”

war 1812   11

 

Burning of Buffalo
Things were quiet until early June when Riall reported to Drummond at York that enemy action was evident and military movements indicated an offensive was not far off. It came in July 1812 and resulted in American forces capturing Fort Erie and establishing a foothold on the frontier. On July 3rd some 4000 men under Major General Jacob Brown set out for Burlington Heights. Preparing to confront and repel these raiders, Riall after ordering reinforcements to follow, left with a force of light companies for Chippewa, some eighteen miles north of Fort Erie.

war 1812  12

Map of the Battles of Chippewa & Lundy’s Lane
On arrival Riall prepared to pit his 1500 men against Brown and Winfield Scott’s advance guard of 2000. He believed because the troops were dressed in grey uniforms that they were members of the American militia. Too late he realized he was mistaken. The steady discipline and the precision, parade-ground manoeuvring of Scott’s men facing British fire led Riall to exclaim in surprise, “Those are regulars, by God!” The two forces met at Chippewa in a classic European-style battle. Riall leading bravely from the front was bested by the well-trained Americans. He broke off the attack and retired from the field, the humiliated general being one of the last to leave.

war 1812  13

American Charge at the Battle of Chippewa
British losses totalled more than 350 men killed or wounded or missing and presumed captured, while Scott’s forces suffered 300 killed, wounded or missing. While not an important victory, the battle’s psychological effects were significant. Regulars on both sides met and manoeuvred on an open plain and the Americans won. This battle is commemorated by the grey uniforms worn by cadets at the United States Military Academy at West Point.

war 1812  14

Battle of Chippewa [U.S. National Archives]
Following the American victory Riall retreated all the way back to Fort George with the Americans in hot pursuit. Brown’s forces then encamped at Queenston where they awaited the arrival of Commodore Chauncey’s naval force for a joint assault on the British occupying forts George and Niagara. However, Chauncey wanted no part in the offensive, declaring he had no intention of serving as “an agreeable appendage” to Brown’s army and simply never showed up. After waiting two weeks for the navy to arrive, Brown decided it was beyond his military means to attack and fearing being routed the redcoats, he withdrew his soldiers to Chippawa. Riall followed with his forces. Meanwhile Drummond after dispatching another British brigade to menace the American depot at Fort Schlosser, followed Riall with additional troops.
The Battle of Lundy’s Lane
When Riall arrived at Lundy’s Lane, a low hill no more than 25 feet in elevation about a mile from the falls, he positioned a battery of six cannons on the ridge and deployed his men in defensive positions. He had been ordered by Drummond to follow and harass the enemy but not to confront them in battle. When Brown learned about the British raid on Lewiston and that another British brigade was advancing on Fort Schlosser, he feared for his communications on the east bank of the river and decided to initiate an offensive of his own on the west bank to draw off some of the British forces on the east side of the river. He ordered Scott’s brigade to advance from Chippawa. Before long Scott encountered Riall’s forces at Lundy’s Lane and on July 25th, 1814 prepared to move against their position. In accordance with Drummond’s directions to avoid a confrontation with American forces, Riall ordered the withdrawal of his forces only to have that countermanded by Drummond who had just arrived with reinforcements. Intent on driving Brown out of the province, Drummond prepared for battle.

war 1812 15

British Artilleryman
The two armies clashed that evening around six o’clock. Within twenty paces line engaged line separated by a perfect sheet of fire. Both sides opened up an intensive artillery fire, the British 24-pounders of the Royal Artillery tearing up the American attackers. Early in the conflict Rial was wounded in the arm and as he was being borne away the shout went out, “Make way for General Riall!” The Americans quickly obliged for Riall’s stretcher-bearers were confused by the twilight and headed right into the American lines. Riall spent the rest of the summer and fall in comfortable captivity. A fellow prisoner, a young militia officer named William Hamilton Merritt, described Riall as “very brave, near-sighted, rather short and stout.” Riall was released on parole in November and before departing for England, the caring commander visited all other British prisoners.

war 1812   16

Plan of the Battle of Lundy’s Lane

war 1812 16

With the arrival of reinforcements, the American forces numbered some 3000 and British about 2800. Believing he was badly outnumbered Drummond threw caution to the winds and decided to take the defensive and hold off American attacks on his position. His foe failed to make any impression on the centre of the line despite repeated attempts. Charge after charge was beaten back by the British battery. Drummond wrote, “Of so determined a character were the attacks directed against our guns that our artillery men were bayonetted by the enemy in the act of loading and the muzzles of the enemy’s guns were advanced to within a few yards of ours.” About nine o’clock one regiment of Ripley’s brigade succeeded in seizing the British guns on the crest and driving Drummond’s forces back several hundred yards. For the next three hours Drummond counter-attacked unsuccessfully three times. British regulars pressed the American line taking severe punishment from cannon and musket while at the same time repelling American columns attempting to outflank their line. During one of these assaults Drummond while rallying his regulars in the darkness was wounded in the neck.

war 1812 17

Charge!
Desperate charges took place from dusk to darkness with the heroics of war evenly divided, volleys being exchanged almost muzzle to muzzle. The crack of muskets and the roar of cannon were almost continuous with great clouds of smoke arising that almost blotted out the light of the moon. “Both armies fought with a desperation that bordered on madness.” The battle see-sawed back and forth until midnight when the American offensive thrust was spent and a party of light infantry recaptured the British guns. Scott, who had two horses shot out from under him, went down with a bullet-shattered shoulder. About the same time, Brown, who was crippled by wounds, ordered Brigadier General Eleazir Ripley commanding the dazed and bleeding American defenders to withdraw. Drummond was content to lick his wounds and an equally exhausted British army held the field unable to follow.
At daybreak both armies had their ranks diminished by a comparable number of casualties: Reported by the British: 84 killed; 559 wounded; 235 missing. Reported by Americans: 171 killed; 572 wounded; 117 missing. [* * *]. The battle was the hardest and bloodiest of the war fought in Canada. In the cold light of day it became obvious to Ripley that his forces were exhausted and would not be replenished. Drummond wrote, “The enemy abandoned his camp, threw the greater part of his baggage, camp equipages and provisions into the rapids and having set fire to Streets Mills and destroyed the bridge at Chippawa, continued his retreat in great disorder towards Fort Erie.” Had Drummond followed closely on the heels of the retreating Americans and forced them to fight again victory might have been complete. The fiery fight that night was the sharpest of the war on Canadian territory. It was a tactical standoff but a strategic victory for Drummond. In the words of Winston Churchill, “The advance from Niagara was checked by a savage drawn battle at Lundy’s Lane near the Falls.

war 1812  18

The Cut and Thrust of Battle
Various versions of the Battle of Lundy’s Lane taken from the following sources.
Encyclopedia of American History
During the War of 1812 the British movement towards New York was met by Gen. Jacob Brown who took the initiative and met the British at Lundy’s Lane near Niagara Falls in Canada. Brown out-fought the enemy but fell back when he learned that strong British reinforcements were on the way. Both sides claimed victory.
Messages and Papers of the Presidents  After his defeat at Chippewa in 1814 General Riall retired by way of Queenston toward the head of Lake Ontario. He was soon reinforced and returned to attack the Americans under Brown who had pursued him as far as Queenston. Hearing of British reinforcements Brown retreated to the Chippewa River and on July 24, 1814 encamped on the south bank where he had defeated Riall on the 5th. On the 25th Gen. Scott, with about 1,200 men, went forward to reconnoiter and came upon the British army, 4,500 strong, near Niagara Falls, on Lundy’s Lane. a road leading from the Falls to the end of Lake Ontario. Soon the entire American force was engaged. the battle lasting from sunset until midnight.

The American forces numbered about 2,500 men. During the engagement Gen. Scott and Lieutenant Colonel Miller distinguished themselves for daring and efficiency. The British were finally driven back and forced to abandon their artillery, ammunition, and baggage. Both armies claimed the victory though both left the field. The American loss was 171 killed, 571 wounded, and 110 missing – a total of 852 out of nn army of 2,500. The British lost 84 killed, ‘559 wounded, 103 missing and 42 prisoners – a total of 878 out of an army of 4.500. Generals Brown and Scott were among the wounded.
From Sea to Shining Sea
Brown followed up Scott’s victory by pressing the British back to Fort George and Burlington Heights. Encamping at Queenston, he awaited the heavy guns needed to reduce the enemy forts. They were slow in coming from Chauncey at Sackets Harbor, and Brown was forced to return to Chippewa on July 24. In the interval, General Drummond had hurried to the Niagara from Kingston. He now ordered his three thousand-man force out in pursuit of the Americans. While Riall followed Brown, another force crossed the river to menace Brown’s supplies. Brown became worried. He sent Winfield Scott down the Canadian side of the river in hopes of forcing the enemy to recall his troops from the American side. Scott came upon Riall at Lundy’s Lane, a point a mile below the falls, and immediately attacked. Such was Scott’s audacity that Riall was forced to retire. But just then Drummond came up with the rest of his army, ordering the cross-river detachment to rejoin him. Drummond put his artillery on a hill, with his infantry in line slightly to the rear. Scott attacked again, directing his brigade against the British center and left. On the left, the Americans temporarily turned the British flank, capturing the wounded Riall while doing so. But the British eventually recovered there, while in the center they hurled back charge after charge. Still Scott hung on, until, at about five o’clock, Brown arrived with the rest of his army.
Brown ordered another attack. The lines swept forward in a darkness shimmering with the flashes of the British guns, but they could not seize the hill and the British battery blazed on. Brown ordered Colonel James Miller of the 21st Infantry to take the British works. While the enemy guns thundered at an American column moving along the river. Miller’s regulars slipped forward through the darkened scrub. Coming to within a dozen yards of the enemy, they crashed out a close volley, charged with the bayonet and seized both hill and battery. Now Brown brought his entire army up to the hill, and the astonished Drummond counterattacked. Three times the dark silhouettes of the British regulars swept upward, and three times the muzzles of American muskets and the captured guns flickered and flamed to drive them back again. Brown and Scott were both hit and evacuated. Around midnight, Brown ordered Ripley, now commanding on the hill, to withdraw for water and ammunition. He did, but he also left some of the enemy guns behind. With daylight Drummond quickly reoccupied the height and turned the guns around-restoring the situation of the preceding day except that both sides were battered and bleeding and each minus about nine hundred men.
In the Battle of Lundy’s Lane the Americans might just possibly have won a tactical victory, but they suffered strategic defeat. Lundy’s Lane put out the ardent flame enkindled by Chippewa and forced Brown to abandon all hope of conquering Upper Canada. He withdrew into Fort Erie. The energetic Drummond assaulted him there on August 15, but the American repulsed him. On September 17 Brown led a sally out of the fort to seize and spike the British guns. No less than five hundred men fell on both sides during this bitter flare-up, and now both Brown’s and Drummond’s armies were exhausted remnants. Drummond issued orders proclaiming a victory, and then fell back to Chippewa. Less than two months later the Americans acknowledged the futility of fighting on the Niagara Frontier by blowing up Fort Erie and recrossing the river to American soil.
All had not been in vain, however, if only for the gleam that Chippewa, Lundy’s Lane and Fort Erie gave to a young but thus far lusterless military tradition. The cost had been high. James Miller, the hero of Lundy’s Lane, wrote a friend: “Since I came into Canada this time every major save one, every lieutenant-colonel, every colonel that was here when I came and has remained here has been killed or wounded, and I am now the only general officer out of seven that has escaped.” But now the guns fell forever silent along the forty-mile strait separating New York and Ontario. For the focus of the war had long ago shifted east, where the weight of British arms flowing to the United States from victorious European battlefields was bearing the fledgling American eagle to the earth.
Thundergate A raid back toward Queenston, commanded by Scott, on July 25 grew into the bloodiest battle of the war. The main armies, each with about three thousand men, met at Lundy’s Lane, a half mile east of the falls, forty minutes before sunset. They fought until midnight. Both Scott and Brown were wounded and carried back to Buffalo. General Drummond was wounded. Riall was wounded and captured. Bewildered without the leadership of Brown or Scott, the Americans retired to Fort Erie. The Canadians were too battered and weary to follow. Each army had lost nearly a third of its command: 860 for the Americans, 878 for the Canadians.
The wounds received by Jacob Brown and Winfield Scott were critical. Both were out of the war. General Izard succeeded to the Niagara command. Commodore Chauncey finally consented to carry him and three thousand reinforcements up lake as far as Irondequoit Bay. But the march from Irondequoit to Buffalo gave Drummond’s Canadians time for a series of attacks against Fort Erie. Their attack on the night of August 15 took one of the Erie bastions.
The Path of Destiny
Brown’s suspicion of an overwhelming British force moving against him was groundless, as he was soon to discover. Sir George Prevost’s powerful reinforcements were being concentrated about Montreal for quite another purpose. Upper Canada was General Drummond’s nut and he was left to crack it with what troops he had. His subordinate Riall was already on the move, hoping to catch Brown’s retreating army by a surprise attack from the flank. His advanced force, which he led in person, was composed almost entirely of veteran Canadian regulars and militia. These troops marched by interior roads toward Niagara Falls through the night of July 24, and soon after daylight they halted to rest on Lundy’s Lane, just where that dusty track passed over a small rise in the farm land, close to the famous cataract. They numbered less than a thousand men. The rest of Riall’s force, a thousand British regulars and three hundred militia, were in the camp at Twelve Mile Creek (St. Catharines) with orders to march at dawn on the twenty-fifth. Through some confusion of the orders these troops did not set out for Lundy’s Lane until noon, giving themselves a long trudge in the afternoon heat.
The information of both sides, usually good and often prompt for that horseback age, was curiously at fault. Neither army knew where the other was and neither could guess the other’s intentions. Darkness had covered the march of Riall’s Glengarries, New Brunswickers and other Canadians to Lundy’s Lane, and there were no British troops on the river road to keep in touch with Brown’s retreat. The highway from Queenston to Chippewa ran roughly north to south, separated from the Niagara by a strip of woods and fields half a mile from Lundy’s Lane in the west, a handy route for Riall on his right-hook march to Niagara Falls. When his Canadians halted on the rise in the fresh morning light they could hear the boom and see the mist of the great waterfall a mile or so away.
The American army stood beside its tents at Chippewa, invisible three miles to the south, watching the river road and unaware of Riall’s approach. General Brown had posted a troop of volunteers at Lewiston, some miles down the American side of the Niagara gorge, to watch the Queenston road across the river and report the expected British march. At last it came and the volunteers sent word up the river. But it was not the march of Riall’s men.
When General Drummond heard the bad news of the Chippewa battle he knew that Riall faced the main invasion. Yeo’s ships were windbound in Kingston harbor. Drummond set off by road for York with the pick of his redcoats, leaving the rest to come on by ship as soon as the wind changed. On the evening of July 24, just as Drummond’s marching men arrived there, four of Yeo’s ships appeared at York with the rest of the Kingston force. Drummond’s troops joined them, and with a good night breeze the ships arrived at Niagara’s mouth at daybreak on the twenty-fifth just as Riall’s Canadians reached Lundy’s Lane twelve miles up the river.
Colonel Tucker, commanding the fort garrisons at the mouth, could offer only vague news, chiefly that the American army had threatened Fort George and then vanished up the Canadian bank, that Riall was inland somewhere making for Niagara Falls, and that the only American troops on the lower river were a small group at Lewiston. Drummond had been obliged to leave a garrison at Kingston. His own few companies added to the garrisons of Forts George and Niagara made up a force of a thousand, all veteran British regulars. He sent half of them up the American bank with Tucker and the rest along the Canadian side under Colonel Morrison, the hero of Chrysler’s Farm. Tucker was to capture or destroy the American troop at Lewiston and then recross the Niagara, joining his force to Morrison’s at Queenston on the other side.
All this was done with speed but the two hundred Americans at Lewiston got away, leaving behind a store of tents, baggage, and supplies intended for Brown’s army. At Queenston General Drummond rested and fed his united columns after the morning’s exertions and sent back a few companies to guard the forts below. With the 850 remaining redcoats he set off along the river road toward the south. The time was well on into the afternoon. Unknown to Drummond, the rear half of Riall’s force was only now making its way toward Lundy’s Lane by the zigzag tracks of the plateau, so that both of these bodies of British troops were moving miles apart in the fierce July heat but heading for the same destination, the road junction near Niagara Falls where Riall’s advance guard stood. The American army was still in the Chippewa camp, an hour’s march beyond the junction. Until noon General Brown had no news of the British at all, but then came a message from Lewiston. It said that British ships had arrived at Niagara in the night, that boats were moving up the river, and that redcoats could be seen marching toward Queenston. Soon after this came another hasty report saying that British troops were in Lewiston itself. These were Colonel Tucker’s men; but with this scanty information General Brown made a summary of the British movements, partly right and partly wrong – that Drummond had come up the lake to Niagara, joined his troops to Riall’s at Queenston, and sent part of his army across to the American bank for a thrust at Brown’s communications.
A lesser American soldier, a Hull or a Hampton, would have quit Canadian soil and turned back to the defense of Buffalo. Brown was a fighter and he saw an opportunity. The British army evidently was divided by the river and he had a chance to destroy the force at Queenston before the other got back to support it. He waited for confirming news of a British march up the American bank from Lewiston, but as the afternoon drew on without further word he ordered Scott’s brigade to strike at Queenston, ten miles by road below.
Scott moved off between four and five o’clock in the afternoon with his four regiments of infantry, two troops of cavalry, and a pair of field guns, in all 1200 men, the victors of Chippewa and the best troops in Brown s army.The sun was well down the sky but there was no slacking in the heat. As the head of his column reached the house of a Mrs. Wilson, close to the thunder of the falls, Scott had surprising news. A British force of some strength was moving in from the west and had halted on the gently rising ground at Lundy’s Lane, which joined the main highway a mile or so ahead. He sent this word back to General Brown, moved on half a mile, and then swung left off the highway, deploying his troops through the fields and orchards facing Lundy’s Lane. The rise was before them, not large or high, a mere swelling in the farm land with the lane across its top. Riall had with him 390 Canadian regulars, 500 militia, a troop of the Dragoons, and a field battery; altogether 980 men. When he saw the familiar gray jackets of Scott’s brigade moving through the woods and pastures he guessed that he had come upon the main American force. There was no sign of his own rear and he had no knowledge of Drummond’s whereabouts. The bloody experience of Chippewa was fresh in his mind, and with a prudence quite foreign to his former nature he ordered his troops to quit the knoll and draw away down the main river road. At the same time he sent a galloper to find his distant rear and change its line of march to Queenston.
As the sun dipped toward Lake Erie, three sweating columns of redcoats and militia stirred the dust of the country roads; one retiring toward Queenston on the main highway, another trudging by a side route to Queenston, and the third (Drummond’s) hurrying up the road from Queenston to the junction at Lundy’s Lane. On the American part, Scott’s brigade remained deployed toward Lundy’s Lane and the rise; Ripley’s brigade was on the march to them, and Porter’s militia and volunteers were among the tents at Chippewa, preparing, in their indolent way, to follow the regulars. The first encounter was between redcoat and redcoat. Drummond on the river road met Riall marching back. Drummond and his men had been on the march smce dawn but the general was eager for battle, and on hearing Riall’s news he hurried the combined force up to the knoll before the Americans could get there. Together the British now numbered 1800, more than a match for Scott’s brigade until Ripley arrived to support him.
Winfield Scott had expected the usual headlong British attack and it had not come. He was puzzled by the disappearance of the redcoats and their lean militia from the sky line ahead, but soon he saw red tunics and stovepipe shakos on the rise once more, extending their lines to the Queenston road, trundling field guns into position on the crest in their center, and pushing some troops into the woods toward his own left flank. These were obviously defensive arrangements and he decided to attack. He chose the British center and left, sending three of his regiments against Drummond’s soldiers at the road junction and ordering Major Jessup with the fourth and the brigade cavalry to make his way along the wooded strip between the main road and the river. The attack went forward at 6:30 P.M. At the road junction it met the levelled volley of the veteran British regiment and a battalion of veteran Canadian militia, while the battery on the rise belched shrapnel and a special detachment fired a stream of Congreve rocket shells. Each of the three gray waves was shattered, each re-formed and came on again gallantly and the fighting was close and fierce, but at last they were thrown back. The loss was heavy. Scott himself was among the wounded. Only Jessup’s men escaped damage. Moving behind the screen of orchards and scrub woods between the highway and the Niagara, they were able to place themselves in concealment behind the British left flank. There, for the time, Jessup halted.
Ripley’s brigade of bluecoats was now arriving on the scene. It was half past seven, sunset, and the battle had only begun. In the first of the twilight General Brown drew back into his reserve the three torn battalions of Scotts brigade and replaced them in the battle line with Ripley’s men. At the same time he ordered Porter’s militia and volunteers to move through the woods against the British right flank. These dispositions took time, and night had fallen when the fighting flared up again. Jessup’s infantry and horsemen made the first move, springing out of the trees and planting themselves across the road to Queenston at the British rear. Here they captured two noteworthy prisoners; General Riall, badly wounded in the fighting at the junc tion and riding back in the dark, and Drummond’s aide. Captain Loring, carrying a message to the British troops on the flank. But Jessup was in a dangerous position without support, and in a short time a British counterattack hustled him off the road with the loss of one third of his men. It was full dark now and although a moon shone fitfully through the smoke, the battle became a blind struggle of regiments and fragments of regiments groping for each other in the bloody angle of the two roads and in the trampled crops and grass on the slope behind.
At nine o’clock the long-missing rear of Riall’s force tramped up the road from Queenston just as the battle reached a new pitch. Brown had made a sudden double thrust at the Lundy’s Lane knoll. The left attack, made chiefly by Porter’s men, shrivelled and fell away in a blaze of British musketry and cannon fire. On the right the rest of the U. S. Infantry, stealing up behind a creeper-covered fence, were able to see in a patch of moonlight and to shoot down every gunner in the busy British battery at a few yards’ range. They leaped forth, dashed past the guns and over the crest. A fierce clash of bayonets and musket butts followed there, but General Brown, close at hand, brought up two field guns and elements of two other regiments to their support and the British were driven back. The road junction, the knoll and the British battery were all in American hands. At this moment Riall’s rear force came up in a darkness made almost solid by the choking powder smoke. The head of the column plodded straight into the old British position at the junction, where it was roughly handled by Brown’s alert infantry. The shock of this reception after their dreary nine-hour march was startling, scores of tired and bewildered redcoats found themselves prisoners and it was some time before their own officers and Drummond’s staff were able to get the rest with their two field guns into some kind of order in the changed line of battle. But then with his whole force assembled after all the various marches of the day and evening, Drummond led them up the slope.
The Americans on the crest shot hard at the gleam of crossbelts stumbling at them in the murk, but by that time the British bayonets were close. The survivors fell back to their old line in the trees and fields below the lane. They lost their two cannon but dragged away one of the captured British guns, a blind swap in the hurry. Drummond now had a grip on the hillock that nothing could shake. For three hours 1800 British troops had borne all of the American attacks, but with the arrival of Riall’s belated column Drummond had drawn into the battle 1910 British regulars, 390 Canadian regulars and 800 Canadian militia, a total of 3 100 men. Against them Brown had thrown the 2700 regulars of Scott and Ripley, Porter’s 1350 New York militia and Pennsylvania volunteers, and 150 “Canadian Volunteers” led by the renegade Willcox.

war 1812  19

British Defending A Cannon
However, Porter had done little fighting and the egregious Willcox had devoted his efforts to raiding farmhouses behind the British lines and capturing unwary stragglers. The burden of the American battle was carried first and last by the regulars in gray and blue and for more than two hours longer these gallant men persisted in attacks up a slope defended by the united British force. Both sides were now exhausted. Water was not to be found in the fighting zone, and after their marches and struggles in the merciless heat of a Niagara summer day and evening the men were choking for lack of it.
Fatigue and thirst finally defeated them all. Toward midnight the battle for a grassy bump on an obscure Canadian country lane came to an end, and as the last shots died away the natural sound of that region could be heard once mo – the boom and rush of Niagara Falls in the sudden quiet of the night. When the British called their rolls in the morning they counted killed 555 wounded and 235 missing, altogether a loss of 878 men. The Americans reckoned their loss at 171 killed, 572 wounded, and no missing, a total of 853. Many of the missing on both sides were prisoners, but after the battle the British found and buried 210 American bodies on the field. The higher proportion of captured British was chiefly due to the misadventure of Riall’s second column in the dark.
The higher proportion of Americans killed was due to the blasts of shrapnel from the British battery, to the deadly shooting of the redcoats and militia when Scott made his open attack on the road junction, and to the rocket missiles. In the close nature of the fighting not even generals escaped the bullet storm. Drummond had been wounded, Riall was wounded and a prisoner, and on the American side Scott had a severe wound and so had Brown himself. The pain of Brown’s wound forced him off the field toward the last, when he turned over the command to Ripley. According to his dispatches to Washington, he ordered Ripley to march the troops back to the Chippewa camp for food and rest and to return at daylight to renew the battle if the British were still there. But Ripley failed him. Soon after midnight the American troops left the battlefield. Their dead and severely wounded lay where they had fallen. The British soldiers, as Brown had guessed, were too exhausted to pursue. When the fighting ceased they dropped on the ground and slept where they were.
In the morning Ripley broke his camp, burned the restored Chippewa bridge, tossed some of his supplies and tents into the Niagara, and retired up the river to Fort Erie, setting fire to the mills at Streets Creek as he passed.
Oxford Encyclopaedia of Canadian History
Lundy’s Lane, battle of. On July 25th, 1814, Jacob Brown, the American general, had concentrated about four thousand men at Chippawa and advancing down the Niagara with part of his force, came in contact with the advance guard of the British under Pearson at Lundy’s Lane. Sir Gordon Drummond, the British general, arrived later with reinforcements. Altogether he had in the neighbourhood of three thousand men, but the odds fluctuated throughout the day, sometimes one side sometimes the other being in superior force. Drummond placed seven field pieces on the crest of the rise, and, as at Queenston, the stubbornly fought battle raged around these guns. The battery repeatedly changed hands, and the battle continued far into the night. About midnight the Americans retreated, leaving the British masters of the field of Lundy’s Lane. The loss had been heavy on both sides, among the British wounded being Drummond and Riall and among the Americans Brown and Winfield Scott.
Riall: Took part in the contest on the Niagara Frontier; in command of the British troops at the Battle of Chippawa.
Drummond: took a prominent part in the War of 1812, from Dec. 1813 to April, 1815 president and administrator of Upper Canada and during this period succeeded in turning the tide of victory to the British forces. Defeated the Americans at Niagara, July 25th, 1814 and followed this up by occupying Fort Erie in November.

 

A Military History of Canada

The British were not alarmed; they had met this kind of threat before. With fifteen hundred regulars, two hundred militia, and three hundred Indians, Riall headed south and on July 5 met Winfield Scott’s brigade at Chippewa. Though he was almost caught drinking coffee at a farmhouse, Scott got away on foot, formed his troops, and waited silently as Riall sent his men forward in a precipitate attack. The British got a devastating surprise. Far from fleeing, Scott’s men opened fire and manoeuvred like the professionals they had become. Out of 1500 men, Riall lost over 500 dead and wounded; Scott, with a slightly smaller force, lost 270. Riall withdrew and Brown advanced to besiege both Fort George and Fort Niagara, confident that Chauncey would soon join him. In fact, the American fleet did not appear but Drummond did, with all the British troops he could collect. Brown withdrew and then, worried about his supplies, marched back again. Late on the afternoon of July 25, the two armies clashed at Lundy’s Lane, south of Queenston.

It was a soldiers’ battle, fought hand to hand late into the night. The British battalions held their ground; brigade after brigade of Americans pushed forward, hidden by dense smoke and then twilight. On both sides, guns were pushed into the front line until they were muzzle to muzzle. British battalions gave ground; Drummond drove them back. Riall was wounded and then captured when his stretcher-bearers blundered into American lines. Brown and all but one of his generals were wounded. So was Drummond. Finally, the Americans had no more reserves. A single British regiment, arriving late, was thrown into the fight. At midnight the exhausted Americans fell back. Drummond forced his men to advance a mile and there the worn-out survivors slept. Next day the exhausted Americans withdrew to Fort Erie. If he had pursued the Americans Drummond might have done fatal damage to the best American army. It was utterly beyond his strength or that of his men.
By August 3 when the British reached Fort Erie, it had been rebuilt and garrisoned. By now, American dominance of Lake Ontario left Drummond with an acute supply shortage. Steady driving rain turned roads into quagmires and converted the land around Fort Erie into a dreary malarial swamp. British morale plummeted. An attack on August 15 was an utter failure. One veteran regiment, DeWatteville’s, refused to fight. Others were little better. More than nine hundred British, including some of the ablest of Drummond’s officers, were killed, wounded, or captured. Finally, Drummond withdrew to Chippewa but the Americans, too, were demoralized. By late October, they had abandoned Fort Erie. Completed at last, the St. Lawrence made a single voyage escorting supplies and reinforcements to Niagara. It was now Chauncey’s turn to take shelter and to wait for his own answer – two monstrous battleships, each bigger than Yeo’s new flagship. Surely that was a challenge the British could never match.
The War of 1812
Brown expected Chauncey’s ships to bring him supplies and to support his attacks on the British-held forts. But Chauncey feared for the safety of Sackets Harbor, even though he now had two new ships which made his fleet more powerful then Yeo’s. As days passed and no help arrived, with his army declining in strength, Brown felt increasingly insecure at the end of a long and exposed supply line. On July 24, he withdrew to Chippawa. Riall decided to follow Brown and so, that night, sent 1,000 regulars under Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Pearson up the Portage Road. The next day, Riall led the rest of his troops in the same direction and soon after, came Drummond leading the 89th Regiment. They were heading towards a hill on Lundy’s Lane where it crossed the Portage Road.
When Brown heard about the British advance, he changed his plans. He sent Scott with his brigade back to retake Queenston and prepared to follow with the rest of the army. They would march north along the Portage Road and so meet the British at Lundy’s Lane. The outcome of these converging movements was the battle at Lundy’s Lane which for several reasons, was both a confused and a prolonged action. The American army advanced in parts with Scott’s brigade well ahead.Sections of the British forces were retreating and others advancing because their commanders were not sure of the size of the invading army. Furthermore, the struggle lasted from about 6 p.m. until midnight which meant that much of it was fought in the dark, illuminated only by the flashes of guns and muskets.
As the Americans advanced, Riall ordered Pearson to withdraw from Lundy’s Lane. He thought Brown’s whole army was attacking and did not know that Drummond was coming to his support. When Drummond arrived at the hill, he saw the American attack developing and immediately recognized that whoever possessed that high ground would have the advantage. He stopped the withdrawal and sent orders to other detachments to hurry to Lundy’s Lane. The key of the position was the hill where British artillery was placed to fire at any advancing force. The Americans tried to take the guns by assaulting the flanks as well as the front. Scott’s men almost succeeded in getting around the left flank but were driven back after capturing Riall, who had been seriously wounded. The Americans were not strong enough to advance again until the rest of their army arrived.
Brown renewed the attack, and a small detachment captured the British guns. They were soon forced back by British troops attacking with bayonets. The fighting raged back and forth on the hill, neither side able to gain complete control. Dead and wounded soldiers lay where they had fallen on the battlefield. Still the living continued to battle though the light was fading. At some time after 9 o’clock, Colonel Hercules Scott arrived with 1,200 men to reinforce the British line. The British soldiers charged and beat off American attacks. Brown and Winfield Scott were both wounded and withdrew from the battle. Drummond, though wounded in the neck, continued to command. Finally, just before midnight, Brown ordered his exhausted army to retreat to Chippawa. The British troops and Canadian militia were too weary to do anything but fall asleep on the battlefield. Losses were heavy on both sides. Over 700 Americans and 600 British were killed or wounded, making Lundy’s Lane the bloodiest battle of the war. It was also a turning point: Brown’s advance into Upper Canada was stopped. This was the last invasion of the province.
Neither side can be said to have won the battle (although Brown later claimed he did), but it was the Americans who retreated and who acted like a beaten force. They threw baggage, camp equipment and provisions into the Niagara River, burned Street’s Mills, and destroyed the bridge over the Chippawa. Ripley wanted to withdraw all the way to Buffalo, but Brown insisted on holding onto Fort Erie.
When the Americans had captured the fort it had only three guns and was open in the rear. It was too weak to be held against a determined attack. Brigadier General Edmund P. Gaines, who had replaced Brown, set engineers to work to make it stronger. They made a dry ditch and an earth wall right around the rear of the fort. These were covered by guns placed on newly built bastions. By early August the Americans had about 2,200 troops inside this large and now well fortified camp.
After the battle at Lundy’s Lane, Drummond did not pursue the Americans. He gave his troops time to recover and waited for reinforcements. Yet, there is a strong possibility that if he had advanced quickly to Fort Erie, even a small force might have driven the Americans across the river. In the last days of July, the British might have captured the fort as easily as the Americans had on the third.

Upper Canada: The Formative Years
Units of the army were well drilled near Buffalo by the young Brigadier-General Winfield Scott, who had already shown the qualities that made him a great commander. Brown’s forces, thanks to Scott, were the best American forces to take the field during the war. They crossed the river at the beginning of July and easily took Fort Erie from a small garrison. They intended to push northward toward the lake, then on to Burlington and York. British troops from Fort George and along the lower river rushed south to stem the American advance, General Phineas Riall led them in a reckless assault against the larger American army at Chippawa on the fifth. Rather than their regular blue uniforms, the American regulars wore the grey of the militia.. Rial seeing this assumed an assault would break their ranks and rout their forces. Too late he realized, “They’re regulars, by God.” On this occasion American regulars proved to be the equal of British regulars and Riall’s men were forced back. Brown’s plans now received a check, since Chauncey failed to appear with the naval support needed for an advance to the north and west. While Brown waited for Chauncey, and tried to decide what to do next, the commander of the forces in Upper Canada, General Gordon Drummond, hurried to the scene from Kingston to take personal direction of a reinforced army.
The two forces clashed at Lundy’s Lane, a mile west of Niagara Falls, on the late afternoon of July 25, and in the next several hours fought the bitterest battle of the entire war. Each side hurled desperate charges against the other. Casualties were heavy in both armies, as Drummond, Riall, Brown, and Winfield Scott were all severely wounded and Riall taken prisoner. By midnight, however, the Americans were too exhausted to make another attack, and fell back leaving Drummond’s men in possession of the field. They, in turn, were too exhausted to pursue. The American offensive thrust was now spent and although Drummond’s assault on Fort Erie in the middle of August was bloodily repulsed, no further advance of any consequence was attempted. In November the new American commander. General George Izard, blew up Fort Erie and went into winter quarters on the New York side.

war 1812 21

Fort Erie Commemorative Stamp
The Canadian Encyclopedia
Lundy’s Lane, site of a battle fought between American troops and British regulars assisted by Canadian fencibles and militia, took place on the sultry evening of 25 July 1814, almost within sight of great cataract. The action swayed to and fro, as the troops fought each other with reckless abandon in pitch darkness. The British regulars, mainly the Royal Scots and the 8th, 41st and 89th Regiments of Foot, were steadfast in defence and bold adversaries in attack. Sir Gordon DRUMMOND, the Canadian-born British field commander, was wounded and his second-in-command captured. By midnight the British and Canadians held the field and while the hard-fought battle was indecisive, if was the Americans who withdrew and retired towards Fort Erie. Casualties were high on both sides, but the Americans suffered more killed. The battle was the toughest and most bitterly contested of the WAR OF 1812.

Lundy’s Lane Monument
Wellington’s victories in Europe resulted in the release of British forces for service in North America. As a result, the initiative passed to the Canadian side. The Americans returned to the Niagara frontier where after early successes there they were stopped at the murderous battle of Lundy’s Lane in July 1814. They won engagement at Chippawa but failing to secure naval support were unable to achieve a decisive victory at the battle of Lundy’s Lane and were forced back to Fort Erie.  Where Were the Wounded Treated?
The active services of the troops were continued for a period of nearly three years. The campaign of 1814, which preceded the ratification of peace in the following spring, was rendered important by the successful achievements of the army. Being stationed at York in charge of the general hospital during the greater part of that year’s campaign, a favourable opportunity was afforded me of witnessing the state of the sick and wounded who were sent thither from the army. That part of the province, I may observe, which stretches from Fort George to Fort Erie. was the principal field of active operation. After the several actions which were fought in that tract of the country, the wounded were immediately conducted to the rear as far as Fort George whence they were. shipped on board small vessels, conveyed across the western extremity of Lake Ontario to be landed at York and admitted into hospital. On the evening of the second or third day after an action, they generally reached their place of destination.
After the battle of Chippawa which took place on the 5th of July, a considerable number of wounded were disembarked at York and admitted into hospital. Sufficient accommodation being afforded them the routine of medical duty had not as yet met with any obstruction. The battle of Lundy’s Lane, which was fought on the 25th of the same month, being more sanguinary than that of Chippawa, filled the general hospital at York and its adjacent buildings with its numerous wounded. After the latter period, the duty of the medical department not only at York but along the Niagara frontier, became serious and laborious. The skirmishes and casual engagements which occurred during the remainder of the campaign, kept the hospitals more or less filled with wounded till the beginning of winter, when the enemy evacuated Fort Erie and passed over the river Niagara to the peaceful possession of his own territory. Our troops though opposed to a force much greater in number, generally maintained their ground and in almost every encounter had the scale of victory on their side. The task, however, is not mine, either to applaud the well-conducted enterprises of an army or to censure those precipitated measures which in their fatal consequences often obscure the brightest prospects of success.
The general hospital at York, though a commodious building, was deficient in size for the accommodation of the sick and wounded. Its apartments being originally intended for family use were too small for the wards of an hospital, and did not admit of a free ventilation. Neither were the adjoining houses of the hospital which were fitted up for temporary accommodation any way suitable for the reception of the wounded. When in the course of the summer the wounded became so numerous as not to be contained within the general hospital and its outhouses, the church a large and well-ventilated building was dismantled of its seats and for the time being converted into a hospital. The wounded who were admitted into the church hospital had all the advantages of a free ventilation.

war 1812 22

Last Living Veterans of War of 1812
Ontario Public Archives (The War of 1812 by Victor Suthren)
One of them is showing “the hidden hand” secret sign of Freemasonry by having his hand hidden within his great coat.

DIPLOMATIC SECRECY
Diplomatic secrecy now requires that nations have a security agency and Canada’s is known as the Canadian Security Intelligence Service or CSIS for short. One function of CSIS is to protect Canada’s official intelligence while endeavouring to intercept and decipher that of other countries.
Highly confidential messages are protected by using cryptography, the encoding or enciphering of secret messages by mixing up symbols, characters, numerals, letters and words so that they have meaning only when unlocked or deciphered by persons privy to the contents of the message.
During World War II Britain’s cryptoanalysts were vital the country’s survival. Operating under the code name Ultra, Britain’s secret interception organization successfully broke the codes on Hitler’s cipher machine called Enigma. It was a typewriter-like device which scrambled text and was able to provide an astronomical number of alternatives for each letter. Messages typed on it could be unscrambled only by using an identical machine adjusted to the same settings.
While codes, ciphers and secrecy are commonplace in the twenty-first century, diplomatic intelligence and concealment have long existed in relations between nations. This was true in Upper Canada over two hundred years ago when relations between Britain and the United States were anything but friendly. Both countries regularly spied on each other often by intercepting official communications.
Various methods were used in the 18th century to send secret messages. These included invisible ink, with which a secret message could be written between the lines of a regular letter. Correspondents might also use veiled language, for example, writing or talking about the state of an old person’s health which would have a completely different meaning when ‘unlocked’ by the intended recipient. Official couriers were also used to carry confidential correspondence written in cipher. If it were too important even to be committed to paper if was memorized. Another method of ciphering messages required that both parties have a copy of the same book. When Major Andre communicated with Benedict Arnold they used Blackstone’s book, Commentaries on the Laws of England. Each veiled word in their messages was represented by 3 numerals. For example, if one of the coded words was represented by the set of numerals 7.9.293, it represented the 7th word in the 9th line on the 293rd page of that particular book. Unless one knew which book was being used it was impossible to decipher the message.

During Upper Canada’s early days the British Colonial Office played a decisive role in the colony’s destiny. It operated in London from a dilapidated, decaying building on Downing Street through the basement of which the River Thames occasionally flowed. From these ramshackle rooms official dispatches were issued in a steady stream, bearing information and instructions to Britain’s colonial administrators in far-off places. These diplomatic directions were sent in packet ships that took a month to six weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean. Some of the eagerly awaited ships never did survive the long, perilous passage. The vicissitudes of naval warfare and adverse weather resulted in sinkings in stormy seas with all aboard including any top secret messages lost forever in the depths of the ocean.
Other packets succeeded in crossing the ocean only to be seized off the American coast by licensed French or American privateers which flourished along the American seaboard. Privateering was first and foremost a business venture. Conditions for privateering were best in the early months of a war before British convoys and cruisers were put into use. Privateers struck when least expected and surprise was their greatest weapon.
On more than one occasion Governor Simcoe bemoaned the loss of important letters at sea:

“I almost give up hope that these letters may pass the Seas in safety. The French privateers are great enemies to correspondence for on one occasion they caused all my letters from Canada to be thrown overboard.” This drastic action was taken in order to keep the correspondence from falling into enemy hands.
The owners of these predatory vessels were issued what were called letters-of-marque by the French and the American governments. Britain used them as well. They simply represented a licence to pirate by creating a ‘Jolly Roger’ navy. The documents were instruments of state which made the mayhem any privateers could cause legal. They served to increase the size of a nation’s navy at no cost to the public purse by converting each piratical vessel into a “private ship of war.”  One American letter-of-marque issued by President James Madison commissioned the officers and crew of one ship “to subdue, seize, and take any armed or unarmed vessel, public or private, which shall be found, with her apparel, guns and appurtenances and all the goods and effects that shall be found on board.” These captured vessels, or “prizes” as they were called were brought before a government Prize Court which determined whether they were captured “in due form of law” and were, therefore, legitimate prizes.
Once the captured ship was “condemned,” that is, judged to be a legal prize, the spoils were divided between the government and the owner. The larger the captured ship and crew the greater the reward which was known as “Head Money.” Privateering was an essential part of maritime warfare and the principal means at the time of destroying the enemies’ commerce. It has been suggested that some historians exaggerated the value of these ships and the achievements of the men who sailed them. Their primary prey were merchant ships which were slow and lightly armed with few crew. Capturing them with speedy, well-armed, well-manned privateers was hardly heroic, but for the lucky ones it was highly lucrative. The successful ones were in the minority. Of the 526 vessels given letters-of-marque only 207 ever took a prize with 3 out of five returning empty-handed. Warships took 165 merchant ships and privateers captured a further 1344.

In a proclamation to the citizens of Upper Canada dated May 14th, 1793 Simcoe invited them as he put it:

“to distress and annoy the French in any way they could by making capture of their ships and destroying their commerce.”
To legalize this piracy and to motivate men to act His Majesty was pleased to order Letters-of-Marque or Commissions of Privateers and to reward the owners of all armed ships and vessels with “His Majesty’s share of all French ships and property” which might be captured. In other words the privateer was allowed to keep all the loot.
Governments were naturally very interested in receiving any highly sensitive documents discovered in the mail on board these captured ships. In order to prevent this from happening highly secret documents were thrown overboard to prevent them from falling into enemy hands. An example of this occurred shortly after war had been declared by the United States. It took months for this news to reach the hundreds of British ships at sea and American privateers were quick to take advantage of this situation. An unsuspecting British naval schooner Whiting was at anchor off the American coast when an American privateer Dash approached and persuaded the British crew to surrender. Before doing so the British crew immediately threw official dispatches overboard. When a subsequent investigation revealed that these dispatches were intended for the US government the captain of the Dash was ordered to release his prize.
In an attempt to prevent such piracy from taking place His Majesty’s mail was often sent in British ships of war, powerful ships-of-the-line that few flimsy pirate vessels would dare to approach let alone attack. Privateers had no desire to confront a warship but they would fight fiercely if cornered.

Another means of ensuring that the mail got through was to make duplicate copies of all correspondence and dispatch them on different packet ships, the theory being that at least one ship with is set of secret messages would get through to its destination.
The flood of paper that drifted from Navy Hall at Newark across the Atlantic Ocean to Downing Street in London included memoranda, requisitions, petitions, memorials and various requests. This correspondence usually resulted in new instructions being forwarded by return mail from officials at the Colonial Office. Depending on its importance this correspondence came either as regular or as ‘private’ mail. Highly secret communications of a critical or a controversial significance were designated, “Most Private and Secret” and always sent in cipher.
In a letter dated September 1793 and designated ‘Private,’ a worried Governor Simcoe warned his superior, Henry Dundas, Secretary of State for Home Affairs, said that in the event of the anticipated hostilities with the United States little help could be expected from the poor, dispirited people of the Province many of whom:

“have already suffered severely for their Loyalty. They are more apt to regret what they have lost than to remember what they have received.”
Simcoe was referring to the losses the Loyalists had suffered during the American Revolution. He also advised London that no recruits could be raised in the Province because “the Price of Wages is so high” and few men would opt for service in the military for less money. Candid comments such as these regarding colonial morale and military might were not meant for enemy eyes and so were sent in code.
In August 1794 Simcoe sent word to his superior in London that he had received a message from the governor of Vermont which indicated that the people of Vermont wanted to remain friendly with Great Britain and in the event of war between Britain and the United States Vermont might be willing to remain neutral or even to help Great Britain. In an urgent and top secret reply the Duke of Portland warned Simcoe to desist from any attempt to win Vermont’s support for Britain since this might very well “endanger the completion of successful negotiations,” which were then taking place in London between the United States and Britain. These negotiations eventually resulted in Jay’s Treaty which ensured peace between the two countries for 18 years.
Under date of 24 July 1795 Simcoe advised Dundas that the conduct of the United States seemed to indicate war was coming. If this occurred Simcoe wanted to know if: “B, 160 lm 3dp 10 d of the sq n s c 12 q 158 r ts 38 516 1 ny.” This ciphered message asked British officials in the event of war occurring was it permissible to use the services of a particular group of people who were “superior in quantity and of great utility with proper management.” Simcoe was referring to the Native warriors.
In correspondence dated October 24 1795, marked “Most Private & Secret” and sent totally in cipher the Secretary for Home Affairs alerted Simcoe to the possibility of “a British rupture with Spain” and directed him to cultivate carefully and cautiously a close relationship with the leaders of English-speaking settlers who had settled in Spanish territory in the hope that if hostilities did break out between the two countries, these settlers would support Britain against Spain.
Even when packets did sail safely into port there was no guarantee the dispatches they contained would be securely delivered overland to the intended recipient. This was particularly important in the case of official documents for which a trustworthy delivery person was critical. When a reliable courier became available the writer usually began his letter with the words: “Having a safe opportunity by so and so”. Because secret messages were frequently passed between the British ambassador to the United States and Governor Simcoe the British ambassador was overjoyed to learn that Simcoe had found a trustworthy courier to deliver their top secret communications.

The name of this “confidential person” was a citizen of this area, a man named Jonathon Pell. Pell’s father, Joshua, was a friend of Governor Simcoe and Simcoe knew the son could be trusted. Jonathan Pell was a United Empire Loyalist and a local resident of note after whom Pell Street in Chippawa was named.
http://www.uppercanadahistory.ca/ttuc/ttuc1.html

TREASON, TRAITORS, SPIES AND LIES
History is remembered, recovered and invented.
In wartime truth is so precious she must be attended by a bodyguard of lies. Winston Chuchill
“Your acquaintance, now an officer in the Continental Army, was sent by the United States’ Congress to Niagara as a spy in order to report on the state of Fort Niagara and the British garrison therein.”

This message along with a warning to watch all Americans particularly any suspicious ones lurking in the vicinity of any British fortress was sent to Lieutenant-Governor John Graves Simcoe in 1792. Tensions were high in Upper Canada during this period largely because of American resentment at Britain’s continuing occupation of the Western Posts all of which were on American territory. Despite the fact that Britain had promised to withdraw from them “with all convenient speed,” she failed to do so. Again and again Washington demanded the surrender of the posts but to no avail and the Americans were increasingly frustrated and fuming.
Simcoe feared the Americans were being as he put it: “egged on by a set of designing men who propagated the notorious falsehood that the United States had performed their part in the Treaty [of Paris which ended the American Revolution], but that Great Britain by retaining the Posts had failed to keep her part of the compact.”

Ostensibly, the forts were being held hostage by Britain until the American states permitted the Loyalists to return to the States to claim their possessions and receive compensation for their stolen properties. While it was true that no compensation had been paid by the Americans, it must be admitted that the forts were also being held because Britain wanted to maintain contact with its Aboriginal allies living on land around the posts and to retain control of the fur trade.
It was well known that “the desire the Americans have to possess the Posts is almost incredible,” and that all ranks of the American military from generals downwards were pressing to take them by force. Only the cautious restraint of President Washington maintained the peace.
Fear and mistrust arose between the Americans and the British because of the frequent border clashes occurring between American settlers and Aboriginal braves. Americans believed the latter were simply “willing tools in the hands of England,” whose agents were arming and urging on the Natives. In fact, the Aboriginals were simply fighting to avoid losing all of their land to the never-ending flood of Americans pouring into the western territory.
The flow of Americans into the wide open spaces seemed to the Natives never-ending. Land-hungry interlopers ignored sacred treaties agreed upon by their government and the Native sachems and continued to overrun Aboriginal lands. Although the British did not want war between the Native tribes and United States’ forces, they supported Aboriginal opposition to American settlement of the Ohio country. They hoped the Natives could retain control of this territory which they wanted to serve as an important buffer between Upper Canada and the United States. Another source of tension between the two countries was the desertion to the United States of His Majesty’s troops, a costly and continuing problem. The nearby border beckoned soldiers who with alarming regularity simply disappeared in the night only to re-emerge in the light of day as new citizens in a new land. Many of these men were enticed by agents to cross the border where they were welcomed into the waiting arms of the American military who drained them of every drop of information about British forts, forces, arms and military morale. Accurate information on the enemy’s strength had a decisive effect on any decisions made by the opposing military.

Defectors moved in both directions. The American deserters who flowed north to find land and a new life in the British settlements were every bit as loose-lipped as British deserters, freely disclosing whatever information they felt would bring them the greatest returns. Their intelligence frequently inspired more curiosity than confidence. The value of the information provided by turncoats was always in question and not infrequently the concerns of the British military was that “their mouths would embarrass more than their hands will assist us.” Often the informants’ so-called “intelligence” was little more than fabrication, fictional accounts which failed to stand five minutes’ close cross-examination. Various means were used to test the validity of data received from deserters including intelligence reports provided by Native scouts who usually knew a good deal about local conditions.
One informer’s version of events was compared with details contained in a British officer’s correspondence and found to differ greatly: “to suspect the greater part of what he says is false although he offers to give his oath of the truth of it.”  After the United States took possession of Detroit it was reported that “multitudes of deserters from the American army were daily crossing the river into Upper Canada and committing every species of crime that ever blackened a Newgate calendar.” [Newgate was a notorious prison in England.] One of these so-called ‘settlers’ was a private named William May of the 1st United States Regiment who employed his time in Detroit spying on the British garrison. He used every opportunity to listen to loose talk pertaining to military plans and rendezvous points. He also noted troop strength, the availability of military provisions and the general state of various forts and storehouses. When May returned to Fort Washington several months later he was eagerly debriefed following which he received a reward of 30 pounds. Major General Anthony Wayne of the United States’ army presented another informer with a horse and fifty dollars and sent him to Kentucky.

Britain was particularly apprehensive about American spies and emissaries infesting the province of Quebec and the military there were ordered to be “on guard against treasonable artifices and discourses of enemies prowling about to seduce the people for spies among them were bent on undermining loyalty.” Quebec was thought to be particularly vulnerable because France had declared war on Britain in February 1793, a war that would last until Napoleon, the emperor of France, was defeated at Waterloo in 1815. The Americans favoured France and it was feared undercover agents from France would attempt to enlist support from French Canadians in Lower Canada.

Opposing armies found anything about the enemy of value: information regarding troop strength, areas of weakness, military morale, the availability and quantity of arms and ammunition and any anticipated action. In September 1794 two artillery-men deserted from General Wayne’s army at Fort Defiance. The two, who subsequently arrived on horseback at the the British Fort Miamis, were natives of Ireland and each had several years of military service. They reported that 800 militia men had been dispatched from the American fort for much-needed provisions. On the same day two more Irish deserters arrived at Fort Miamis both of whom were sergeants. They reported that Wayne’s regular forces were using the same materials as the British had used to erect a fort similar to Fort Miamis.
They informed the British that the main body of Wayne’s troops was expected to rendezvous at Fort Greenville which they believed was to become the army’s headquarters.

A third fort was to be built but the informants did not know where. They said that there were no cannons at any fort except Greenville which had one six-pounder. The deserters reported that most of the army pack-horses were unserviceable so militia horses were used for transporting provisions. They also revealed that a large number of Wayne’s soldiers were afflicted with fever, ague and dysentery. For some time they had been forced to exist on half rations of flour and beef and latterly no rations of any kind had been served to the men. They were obliged “to make what shift they could find out.”  It was disclosed that six hundred American militiamen had finally arrived at Fort Defiance with a supply of flour and live bullocks for which they were allowed a month’s service for successfully completing their exceedingly difficult mission. Two other deserters who were brought to the British post by Native braves said they believed it was Wayne’s intention to attempt to bring about peace with the Natives in the hopes of obtaining all Aboriginal trade. Two American deserters from Fort Wayne reported that there was flour but little beef and that was so bad the American troops “take it with difficulty.” The 300 men in the garrison were worked very hard and treated severely as a result of which they were “much discontented and not fifty out of 300 would stay if they could get away safely.”  Another deserter reported that members of the militia had been sent for provisions and heavy guns. The British officer questioned the legitimacy of this: “propagated by the Army solely to raise the spirits of their men and keep them from deserting.”

Another Fort Wayne deserter said that Indians were daily flocking to Greenville to see General Wayne who received them well and gave each Chief a present of one hundred dollars along with “Blankets, Leggins, and presents for all the other Indians.” Wayne informed the Native chiefs that he “would not give up his right to any land where any of his blood was spilt.” Deserters reported that General Wayne intended to return in the spring of 1795 with a stronger force and that “next summer a war is expected with Great Britain.” Whether such serious assertions were true was difficult to prove. Not infrequently they were simply exaggerations resulting from word of mouth messages passed along from many sources the message growing more ominous with each telling. It was a case of “Time adding barnacles to a well-sailed story.” In any case Jay’s Treaty, which was signed in 1794 between the two countries, postponed the British-American confrontation until 1812.

Deserters often crossed paths as they switched sides. As two American turncoats were leaving Fort Defiance they met four British defectors arriving at the American garrison. They also reported seeing a drummer who had deserted from the British 24th Regiment presented with a horse and fifty dollars and sent to Kentucky. Simcoe was losing boats as well as bodies and he attempted unsuccessfully to reach an agreement with the state of New York for the “mutual delivery of all boats and deserters.” He believed that an agreement with the United States “to establish the surrender and delivery of deserters as a matter of reciprocal benefit and duty would check the evil of desertion.”
Drastic methods were used by the military to stop the flight of fugitives. Many were tattooed with a grim apparatus, a spring-like device which when punched caused a set of needles to prick the telltale letter ‘D’ into the offender’s skin. Gunpowder was then rubbed into the wound to make the brand indelible. Some deserters were court-martialled and shot. In spite of these dire consequences desertions continued unabated. The opportunity for a new life in a new land irresistibly beckoned soldiers from an often harsh and always dreary subsistence in a lonely barracks. The success of those who made it encouraged others to seek liberty in a new nation. Another essential source of confidential information regarding enemy forces was the intelligence service.

This was a network of individuals whose duty it was to spy on and report about the enemy. Fast, factual information from these undercover agents could mean the difference between being victorious or being vanquished. A reliable intelligence system permitted one to know what was happening “on the other side of the hill.”  As one commander commented, “It is of the utmost importance to his Majesty’s interests and to the safety of our posts that as regular intelligence as possible should be received of the enemy’s military movements.”  Guerilla activities of agents and Native braves operating behind enemy lines often meant they were important sources of intelligence regarding the whereabouts of American forces. These operatives watched, listened and passed on bits and pieces of information through an intelligence network. It was a commonly made assertion – always out of earshot of the generals of course – that a good spy was worth more than several generals.

http://www.uppercanadahistory.ca/ttuc/ttuc2.html

The Hamilton & Scourge
The Hamilton and Scourge were initially named the Diana and the Lord Nelson respectively, before the War of 1812. The two vessels were merchant schooners; the Lord Nelson was originally a British ship and the Diana was American. The Lord Nelson was built at Niagara, Upper Canada, and was launched on May 1, 1811. The Diana was built in Oswego, New York, and was launched in 1809.
The Hamilton and Scourge were not large specialized war vessels; instead, they were simple merchant ships that were pressed into service for the American Navy just prior to the War of 1812. When pressed into service for the American Navy, the 76-ton Hamilton was armed with eight 18-pound carronades and one 12-pound long gun on a pivot mount, while the 45-ton Scourge was armed with four 6-pound cannons and four 4-pound cannons.
Both vessels foundered in Lake Ontario during a sudden squall just after midnight on August 8, 1813. Today, these vessels rest under 300 feet of water.
The storm of August 8, 1813
Both vessels foundered in Lake Ontario during a sudden squall just after midnight on August 8, 1813. The wrecks were discovered in approximately 290 feet (88 metres) of water in 1973 with side scan sonar deployed from a Canadian government research vessel. A number of investigative dives by manned and unmanned submersibles have taken place on the wrecks since their discovery, including dives in 1980, 1982 and 1990. Ned Myers’ Account of the Sinking of the Hamilton and Scourge Taken from James Fenimore Cooper’s A Life Before the Mast.

The British and American Fleets Pause for the Night
It was a lovely evening, not a cloud visible, and the lake being as smooth as a looking-glass. The English fleet was but a short distance to the northward of us; so near, indeed, that we could almost count their ports. They were becalmed, like ourselves, and a little scattered.
Towards evening, all light craft were doing the same, to close with the Commodore. Our object was to get together, lest the enemy should cut off some of our small vessels during the night … The Crew make Final Preparations before Supper and Rest A little before sunset, Mr. Osgood [the captain] ordered us to pull in our sweeps … we took [them] in as ordered, laying them athwart the deck, in readiness to be used when wanted. The vessels ahead and stern of us were, generally, within speaking distance. Just as the sun went below the horizon, George Tumblatt, a Swede, who was our gunner, came to me, and said he thought we ought to secure our guns, for we had been cleared for action all day, and the crew at quarters. We were still at quarters, in name, but the petty officers were allowed to move about, and as much license was given to the people as was wanted. I answered that I would gladly secure mine if he would get an order for it; but as we were still at quarters, and there lay John Bull, we might get a slap at him in the night. On this the gunner said he would go aft and speak to Mr. Osgood on the subject. He did so, but met the captain (as we always called Mr. Osgood) at the break of the quarter-deck. When George had told his errand, the captain looked at the heavens, and remarked that the night was so calm there could be no great use in securing the guns, and the English were so near we should certainly engage, if there came a breeze; that the men would sleep at their quarters, of course, and would be ready to take care of their guns, but that he might catch a turn with the side-tackle-falls around the pommelions of the guns, which would be sufficient. He then ordered the boatswain to call all hands aft, to the break of the quarter-deck.
As soon as the people had collected, Mr. Osgood said: “You must be pretty well fagged out, men; I think we may have a hard night’s work yet, and I wish you to get your suppers, and then catch as much sleep as you can, at your guns.” He then ordered the purser’s steward to splice the main-brace. These were the last words I ever heard from Mr. Osgood. As soon as he gave the order he went below … The schooner, at this time, was under her mainsail, jib and fore-topsail. The foresail was brailed, and the foot stopped, and the flying-jib was stowed. None of the halyards were racked, nor sheets stoppered. This was a precaution we always took, on account of the craft’s being so tender.
We first spliced the main-brace, and then got our suppers, eating between the guns, where we generally messed, indeed. One of my messmates, Tom Goldsmith, was captain of the gun next to me, and as we sat there finishing our suppers, I says to him, “Tom, bring that rug that you pinned at Little York, and that will do for both of us to stow ourselves away under.” Tom went down and got the rug, which was an article for the camp that he had laid hand on, and it made us a capital bed-quilt. As all hands were pretty well tired, we lay down, with our heads on shot-boxes, and soon went to sleep.
The State of the Scourge prior to Sinking
In speaking of the canvas that was set, I ought to have said something of the state of our decks. The guns had the side-tackles fastened as I have mentioned. There was a box of canister, and another of grape, at each gun, besides extra stands of both, under the shot-racks. There was also one grummet of round-shot at every gun, besides the racks being filled. Each gun’s crew slept at the gun and its opposite, thus dividing the people pretty equally, on both sides of the deck. Those who were stationed below, slept below. I think it probable that, as the night grew cool, as it always does on fresh waters, some of the men stole below to get warmer berths. This was easily done in that craft, as we had but two regular officers on board, the acting boatswain and gunner being little more than two of ourselves.
A Sudden Squall Hits I was soon asleep, as sound as if lying in the bed of a king. How long my nap lasted, or what took place in the interval, I cannot say. I awoke, however, in consequence of large drops of rain falling on my face. Tom Goldsmith awoke at the same moment. When I opened my eyes, it was so dark I could not see the length of the deck. I arose and spoke to Tom, telling him it was about to rain, and that I meant to go down and get a nip, out of a little stuff we kept in our mess-chest, and I would bring up the bottle if he wanted a taste. Tom answered, “This is nothing; we’re neither pepper nor salt.” One of the black men spoke, and asked me to bring up the bottle, and give him a nip too. All this took half a minute, perhaps. I now remember to have heard a strange rushing noise to windward as I went towards the forward hatch, though it made no impression on me at the time. We had been lying between the starboard guns, which was the weather side of the vessel, if there were any weather side to it, there not being a breath of air, and no motion to the water, and I passed round to the larboard side in order to find the ladder which led up in that direction. The hatch was so small that two men could not pass at a time and I felt my way to it, in no haste. One hand was on the bitts, and a foot was on the ladder, when a flash of lightning almost blinded me. The thunder came at the next instant, and with it a rushing of winds that fairly smothered the clap.
The Ship Takes on Water
The instant I was aware there was a squall, I sprang for the jibsheet. Being captain of the forecastle, I knew where to find it, and threw it loose at a jerk. In doing this, I jumped on a man named Leonard Lewis, and called on him to lend me a hand. I next let fly the larboard, or lee top-sail-sheet, got hold of the clew-line, and. assisted by Lewis, got the clew half up. All this time I kept shouting to the man at the wheel to put his helm “hard down.” The water was now up to my breast, and I knew the schooner must go over. Lewis had not said a word, but I called out to him to shift for himself, and belaying the clew-line, in hauling myself forward of the foremast, I received a blow from the jib-sheet that came near to breaking my arm … All this occupied less than a minute. The flashes of lightning were incessant, and nearly blinded me. Our decks seemed on fire, and yet I could see nothing. I heard no hail, no order, no call; but the schooner was filled with the shrieks and cries of the men to leeward, who were lying jammed under the guns, shot-boxes, shot and other heavy things that had gone down as the vessel fell over. The starboard second gun, from forward, had capsized, and come down directly over the hatch, and I caught a glimpse of a man struggling to get past it. Apprehension of this gun had induced me to drag myself forward of the mast where I received the blow mentioned.
I succeeded in hauling myself up to windward, and in getting into the schooner’s fore-channels. Here I met William Deer, the boatswain, and a black boy of the name of Philips, who was the powder-boy of our gun. “Deer, she’s gone!” I said. The boatswain made no answer, but walked out on the forerigging, towards the head-mast. He probably had some vague notion that the schooner’s masts would be out of the water if she went down and took this course as the safest. The boy was in the chains the last I saw of him.
I now crawled aft, on the upper side of the bulwarks, amid a most awful and infernal din of thunder, and shrieks, and dazzling flashes of lightning; the wind blowing all the while like a tornado. When I reached the port of my own gun, I put a foot in, thinking to step on the muzzle of the piece; but it had gone to leeward with all the rest, and I fell through the port, until I brought up my arms. I struggled up again, and continued working my way aft. As I got abreast of the main-mast, I saw someone had let run the halyards. I soon reached the beckets of the sweeps, and found four in them. I could not swim a stroke, and it crossed my mind to get one of the sweeps to keep me afloat. In striving to jerk the becket clear, it parted, and the foreward ends of the four sweeps rolled down the schooner’s side into the water. This caused the other ends to slide, and all the sweeps got away from me. I then crawled quite aft, as far as the fashion-piece. The water was pouring down the cabin companion-way like a sluice, and as I stood for an instant on the fashion-piece, I saw Mr. Osgood, with his head and part of his shoulders through one of the cabin windows, struggling to get out. He must have been within six feet of me. I saw him but a moment, by means of a flash of lightning, and I think he must have seen me. At the same time, there was a man visible at the end of the main-boom, holding on to the clew of the sail. I do not know who it was.

The man probably saw me, and that I was about to spring, for he called out, “Don’t jump overboard! – don’t jump overboard! The schooner is righting.” Ned Myers Jumps Ship but Fortune Finds him Another I was not in a state of mind to reflect much on anything. I do not think more than three or four minutes, if as many, had passed since the squall struck us, and there I was standing on the vessel’s quarter, led by Providence more than by any discretion of my own. It now came across me that if the schooner should right she was filled, and must go down, and that she might carry me with her in the suction. I made a spring, therefore, and fell into the water several feet from the place where I had stood. It is my opinion the schooner sank as I left her.
I went down some distance myself, and when I came up to the surface, I began to swim vigorously for the first time in my life. I think I swam several yards, but of course will not pretend to be certain of such a thing, at such a moment, until I felt my hand hit something hard. I made another stroke and felt my hand pass down the side of an object that I knew at once to be a clincher-built boat. I belonged to this boat, and now I recollected that she had been towing astern. Until that instant I had not thought of her, but thus was I led in the dark to the best possible means of saving my life. I made a grab at the gunwale, and caught in the stern-sheets. Had I swum another yard, I should have passed the boat, and missed her altogether! I got in without any difficulty, being all alive and much excited.
Myers Rescues the First Survivors  My first look was for the schooner. She had disappeared, and I supposed she was just settling under water. It rained as if the floodgates of heaven were opened, and it lighteninged awfully. It did not seem to me that there was a breath of air, and the water was unruffled, the effects of the rain excepted. All this I saw, as it might be, at a glance. But my chief concern was to preserve my own life. I was coxswain of this very boat, and had made it fast to the taffrail that same afternoon, with a round turn and two half-hitches, by its best painter. Of course I expected the vessel would drag the boat down with her, for I had no knife to cut the painter. There was a gang-board in the boat, however, which lay fore and aft, and I thought this might keep me afloat until some of the fleet should pick me up. To clear this gang-board, then, and get into the water, was my first object. I ran forward to throw off the lazy-painter that was coiled on its end, and in doing this, I caught the boat’s painter in my hand by accident. A pull satisfied me that it was all clear! Someone on board must have cast off this painter, and then lost the chance of getting into the boat by accident. At all events I was safe, and I now dared to look about me.
My only chance of seeing was during the flashes, and these left me almost blind. I had thrown the gang-board into the water, and I now called out to encourage the men, telling them I was in the boat. I could hear many around me, and occasionally I saw the heads of men struggling in the lake. There being no proper place to scull in, I got an oar in the after rowlock and made out to scull a little in that fashion. I now saw a man quite near the boat, and, hauling in the oar, made a spring amidships, catching this poor fellow by the collar. He was very near gone, and I had a great deal of difficulty in getting him in over the gunwale. Our joint weight brought the boat down so low that she shipped a good deal of water. This turned out to be Leonard Lewis, the young man who had helped me to clew up the fore-topsail. He could not stand, and spoke with difficulty. I asked him to crawl aft, out of the water, which he did, lying down in the stern-sheets.
I now looked about me and heard another; leaning over the gunwale, I got a glimpse of a man, struggling, quite near the boat, I caught him by the collar too, and had to drag him in very much in the way I had done with Lewis. This proved to be Lemuel Bryant, the man who had been wounded by a hot shot, at York, while the commodore was on board us. His wound had not yet healed, but he was less exhausted than Lewis. He could not help me, however, lying down in the bottom of the boat, the instant he was able.
For a few moments I now heard no more in the water, and I began to scull again. By my calculation I moved a few yards, and must have got over the spot where the schooner went down. Here in the flashes, I saw many heads, the men swimming in confusion and at random. By this time little was said, the whole scene being one of fearful struggle and frightful silence. It still rained, but the flashes were less frequent and less fierce. They told me, afterwards in the squadron, that it thundered awfully, but I cannot say I heard a clap after I struck the water. The next man caught the boat himself. It was a mulatto, from Martinique, who was Mr. Osgood’s steward, and I helped him in. He was much exhausted, though an excellent swimmer, but alarm nearly deprived him of his strength. He kept saying, “Oh! Masser Ned – Oh! Masser Ned!” and lay down in the bottom of the boat like the two others, I taking care to shove him over to the larboard side, so as to trim our small craft.
I kept calling out to encourage the swimmers, and presently I heard a voice saying, “Ned, I’m here, close by you.” This was Tom Goldsmith, a messmate, and the very man under whose rug I had been sleeping at quarters. He did not want much help, getting in, pretty much, by himself. I asked him if he were able to help me. “Yes, Ned,” he answered, “I’d stand by you to the last; what shall I do?” I told him to take his tarpaulin and to bail the boat, which by this time, was a third full of water. This he did, while I sculled a little ahead. “Ned,” says Tom, “she’s gone down with her colours flying, for her pennant came near getting a round turn around my body, and carrying me down with her. Davy has made a good haul, and he gave us a close shave, but he didn’t get you and me.” In this manner did this thoughtless sailor express himself, as soon as rescued from the grasp of death! Seeing something on the water, I asked Tom to take my oar, while I sprang to the gunwale and caught Mr. Bogardus, the master’s mate, who was clinging to one of the sweeps. I hauled him in, and he told me he thought someone had hold of the other end of the sweep. It was so dark, however, we could not see even that distance. I hauled the sweep along until I found Ebenezer Duffy, a mulatto, and the ship’s cook. He could not swim a stroke, and was nearly gone. I got him in alone, Tom bailing, lest the boat, which was quite small, should swamp with us. As the boat drifted along, she reached another man, whom I caught also by the collar. I was afraid to haul this person in amid ships, the boat being now so deep, and so small, and so I drew him ahead, and hauled him in over the bows. This man was the pilot, whose name I never knew. He was a lake-man and had been aboard with us the whole summer. The poor fellow was almost gone, and like all the rest, with the exception of Tom, he lay down and said not a word.

We had now as many in the boat as it would carry, and Tom and myself thought it would not do to take in any more. It is true we saw no more, everything around us appearing still as death, the pattering of the rain excepted. Tom began to bail again, and I commenced hallooing. I sculled about several minutes thinking of giving others a tow, or of even hauling in one or two more, after we got the water out of the boat; but we found no one else. I think it probable I sculled away from the spot, as there was nothing to guide me. I suppose, however, that by this time all the Scourges had gone down, for no more were ever heard from.
The Boat-load of Survivors is Rescued by the Julia
Tom Goldsmith and myself now put our heads together as to what best to be done. We were both afraid of falling into the enemy’s hands, for they might have bore up in the squall and run down near us. On the whole, however, we thought the distance between the two squadrons was too great for this; at all events, something must be done at once. So we began to row, in what direction even we did not know. It still rained as hard as it could pour, though there was not a breath of wind. The lightning came now at considerable intervals, and the gust was evidently passing away towards the broader parts of the lake.
While we were rowing and talking about our chance of falling in with the enemy, Tom cried out to me to “avast pulling.” He had seen a vessel by a flash, and he thought she was English, from her size. As he said she was a schooner, however, I thought it must be one of our own craft, and got her direction from him. At the next flash, I saw her, and felt satisfied she belonged to us. Before we began to pull, however, we were hailed. “Boat ahoy!” I answered. “If you pull another stroke, I’ll fire into you,” came back. “What boat’s that? Lay on your oars or I’ll fire into you.” It was clear we were mistaken ourselves for an enemy, and I called out to know what schooner it was. No answer was given, though the threat to fire was repeated, if we pulled another stroke. I now turned to Tom and said, “I know that voice – that is old Trant.” Tom thought we were “in the wrong shop.” I now sang out. “This is the Scourge’s boat; our schooner is gone down, and we want to come alongside.” A voice now called from the schooner – “Is that you, Ned?” This I knew was my old shipmate and schoolfellow, Jack Mallet, who was acting as boatswain on the Julia, the schooner commanded by Sailing-Master James Trant, one of the oddities of the service, and a man with whom the blow often came as soon as the word. I had known Mr. Trant’s voice, and felt more afraid he would fire into us than I had done of anything which had occurred that fearful night. Mr. Trant himself now called out, “Oh-ho; give way, boys, and come alongside.” This we did, and a very few strokes took us up to the Julia, where we were received with the utmost kindness. The men were passed out of the boat, while I gave Mr. Trant an account of all that had happened. This took but a minute or two.
Mr. Trant now enquired in what direction the Scourge had gone down, and as soon as I told him, in the best manner I could, he called out to Jack Mallet: “Oh-ho, Mallet – take four hands, and go in the boat and see what you can do – take a lantern, and I will show a light on the water’s edge, so you may know me.” Mallet did as ordered, and was off in less than three minutes after we got alongside … Mr. Trant now called the Scourges aft, and asked more of the particulars. He then gave us a glass of grog all round, and made his own crew splice the main-brace. The Julias now offered us dry clothes. I got a change from Jack Reilly, who had been an old messmate, and with whom I had always been on good terms. It knocked off raining, but we shifted ourselves at the galley fire below. I then went on deck and presently we hear the boat pulling back. It soon came alongside, bringing in it four more men that had been found floating about on sweeps and gratings. On inquiry, it turned out that these men belonged to the Hamilton, [commanded by] Lieutenant Winter – a schooner that had gone down in the same squall that carried us over. These men were very much exhausted, too, and we all went below and were told to turn in.
I had been so much excited during the scenes through which I had just passed, and had been so much stimulated by grog that, as yet, I had not felt much of the depression natural to such events. I even slept soundly that night, nor did I turn out until six the next morning.
The Following Day
When I got on deck, there was a fine breeze; it was a lovely day and the lake was perfectly smooth. Our fleet was in a good line, in pretty close order, with the exception of the Governor Tompkins [commanded by] Lieutenant Tom Brown, which was a little to leeward, but carrying a press of sail to close with the commodore. Mr. Trant, perceiving that the Tompkins wished to speak to us in passing, brailed his foresail and let her luff up close under our lee. “Two of the schooners, the Hamilton and the Scourge, have gone down in the night,” called out Mr. Brown, “for I have picked up four of the Hamilton’s.” “Oh-ho!” answered Mr. Trant, “that’s no news at all, for I have picked up twelve; eight of the Scourge’s and four of the Hamilton’s – aft fore-sheet.”
These were all that were ever saved from the two schooners, which must have had near a hundred souls on board them. The two commanders, Lieutenant Winter and Mr. Osgood, were both lost, and with Mr. Winter went down, I believe, one or two young gentlemen. The squadron could not have moved much between the time when the accidents happened and that when I came on deck or we must have come round and gone over the same ground again for we now passed many relics of the scene, floating about in the water. I saw sponges, gratings, sweeps, hats, etc., scattered about and in passing ahead we saw one of the last that we tried to catch; Mr. Trant ordering it done, as he said it must have been Lieutenant Winter’s. We did not succeed, however, nor was any article taken on board. A good look-out was kept for men from aloft, but none were seen from any of the vessels. The lake had swallowed up the rest of the two crews, and the Scourge, as had been often predicted, had literally become a coffin to a large portion of her people.

The story of shipwreck survivor Ned Myers was published by James Fenimore Cooper in 1843.
The tale of the ships was also told by C.H.J. Snider in a book entitled In the Wake of the Eighteen -Twelvers first published in 1913. This was a popular history book written one hundred years after the ships went down.
Other Accounts of the Sinking Account of Sinking in the Buffalo Gazette on August 17, 1813. “It is with deep regret that we record the following facts: about 2 o’clock on Sunday morning last, a most dreadful accident happened in Commodore Chauncey’s squadron off Forty Mile Creek on Lake Ontario; the schooners General Hamilton, Lieut. Winter, and Scourge, Sailing Master Osgood, were upset and lost… The gale lasted but a few minutes and did not affect the ships but injured some of the schooners’ sails. Boats were put out from two of the schooners, which succeeded in rescuing about a dozen of the crews. The Hamilton having nine guns, the Scourge, ten. In a moment 100 of our brave fellows were plunged into the wave, and two of our best schooners lost to the service.”
Chauncey’s Account of the Sinking (he assumes Capt. Yeo knows of the Loss) (The morning following the disaster:)
“This accident giving to the enemy decidedly the superiority, I thought he would take the advantage of it, particularly as by a change of wind he was again brought dead to the windward of me ….” Largest Loss of Life in War of 1812
The sinking of the Hamilton and Scourge was the greatest single loss of life on the Great Lakes during the War of 1812, according to Emily Cain in Ghost Ships.
Captain Yeo’s Account of the Sinking
The British did not at first seem aware of the capsizing of the Hamilton and Scourge; the log book for the Wolfe the morning after the disaster mentions nothing of it. Even the following morning, there is still no mention of the missing ships in Yeo’s reports. On the third day after the accident, the British captured two American schooners (the Julia and the Growler), and it is likely from these captured U.S. seamen that the British were first made aware of the disaster aboard the Hamilton and Scourge.
Yeo finally mentions the accident on the day after the capture of the Julia and Growler, writing that “I am also happy to acquaint you that two of his largest schooners, the Hamilton, of nine guns, and the Scourge, of ten guns, upset the night before last in carrying sail to keep from us, and all on board perished, in number about one hundred. This has reduced his squadron to ten…” http://www.hamilton-scourge.hamilton.ca Discovery in 1973 Locating the Wrecks
The location of the Hamilton and Scourge was first estimated by using Commodore Yeo’s logbook from the Wolfe, which gave his ship’s location the day of the accident: “Light breezes variable, very warm weather. At 5 o’clock the 40 Mile Creek bore SSW distance about 8 miles, wind southerly. Saw the enemy squadron bearing E by S about four or five leagues…” It was Dr. Daniel A. Nelson, a dentist from St. Catharines in Ontario and an amateur archaeologist, who used the Wolfe’s log to first pinpoint the wreck locations. In 1971, Nelson and Dr. A. Douglas Tushingham of the Royal Ontario Museum initiated the Hamilton-Scourge Project to locate the ships, attracting other scientists like Dr. Peter Sly from the Canada Centre for Inland Waters. Find out where the wrecks are located on the map.

Conducting the First Searches
The first searches were made in 1972 using magnetometer and side-scan sonar (see the underwater archaeology section or remote sensing section for details). In 1973, a likely target was identified. Later deep-tow side-scan sonar trials with new equipment in 1975 offered researchers their first views of the vessels, upright on the lake bottom with masts intact.
The First Images of the Wrecks
November of 1975 saw the use of a Tethered Remote Operated Vehicle (TROV) that captured the images of the Hamilton’s ship boat, a platter, spars, some bones and cannonballs. All indications were that the cold, deep water had preserved the ships intact.

war 1812 23

 

war 1812   24
At this time, the two ships were still considered the property of the United States Navy. In 1978, the United States Congress agreed to transfer the title of the ships first to the Royal Ontario Museum, and then to the City of Hamilton.  The transfer officially took place on May 1, 1980.
In the summer of 1980, Jacques Cousteau photographed the Hamilton with his mini-sub, the Soucoupe. The next year, the City of Hamilton created the non-profit Hamilton and Scourge Foundation.

war 1812 25
1,900 still images and 26 hours of video were obtained in May, 1982 by a joint project with the Hamilton-Scourge Foundation and the National Geographic Society. These were the first images of the Scourge. The images were obtained with a remote underwater vehicle.  It is mainly these images that are posted throughout this web site.
http://www.hamilton-scourge.hamilton.ca

Life as a Sailor in War of 1812

Jobs

The jobs of a seaman aboard a schooner were many. Most merchant schooners carried a Captain or Sailing Master, who was sometimes the owner of the vessel. The mate was second-in-command, and was usually responsible for a crew of 3 – 4 seamen and a cabin boy. Any one of these people could assume the role of pilot, and the boy often acted as cook, although some vessels had a full-time cook on board. The “boy” was just a title – the person could be a grown man or woman.
Duties
he crew’s duties required a lot of muscle, for raising the masts, hoisting the anchor, and manning the winches that loaded cargo on board. You also would not want to be afraid of heights!

war 1812  24

A crew member’s day was divided into watches, with each crew member alternating four hour on and four hours off. The night watches were taxing on the seamen, who often had trouble staying awake.
When they were not sailing, the seamen had to help maintain the ship. The rigging had to be repaired, and the masts had to be oiled. The flax sails also had to be repaired and maintained. Every ship, no matter how well built, still took on water, so the ship had to be pumped every day. And, at least once a year, the ship was re-caulked, tarred and painted.
Military Ships / Gun Loading
The regular duties of a seaman were increased if the vessel was in military service. In addition to their regular positions, some men on military vessels were assigned to a gun. In times of war, the gun crew spent the night sleeping beside their gun (as did Ned Myers and his guncrew).

war 1812   25

The Scourge carried enough men to fire all the guns on one side of the ship. Each gun crew had a captain; on the night that the Scourge capsized, Ned Myers was a gun crew captain. The gun captain commanded the crew on where to point the gun and when to fire, with each crew member being assigned a specific role in the loading and firing sequence. Some of the steps in this sequence would include: Loosing the gun from its lashings.
Removing the tompion.
Loading the gun by pushing a flannel bag of gunpowder into the bore, followed by a shot, and finally a wad to prevent the shot from rolling out. This would be rammed as tightly as possible into the gun.
Once loaded, the gun was then “run out” of the gunport (each cannon could roll or slide back onto the deck for loading). The cartridge was pricked by a wire through the touch-hole on the top of the cannon, and then the touch-hole itself was filled with gun powder.
Once the gun was aimed, the gun’s captain fired it by touching a glowing match to the touch hole, being sure to leap away from the gun to avoid the recoil after the gun fired.
After firing, the gun was rolled back onto the deck and “sponged” to extinguish any remaining fire (if fire remained, the gun could go off before the loading sequence was complete). Then the gun could be loaded again.
Provisions Captains had to feed and provision their crews. On March 15, 1812, Commodore Woolsey ordered food for the men stationed at Sackets Harbor. For a year’s worth of supplies for 120 men, he ordered: “74 barrels of beef, 70 barrels of pork, 24 barrels of flour, 27500 pounds of bread, 1600 pounds of cheese, 650 pounds of butter, 2064 gallons of whiskey, 286 gallons of vinegar and 72 bushels of beans.” Clothing The crew of the Hamilton and Scourge had to purchase their “slops”, or working uniforms, from the ship’s purser. Many sailors made their own clothes, because the purser was allowed to mark up the cost of slop clothing and keep the profit for himself. A contemporary list of slop clothing included: common hats, pea jackets, cloth jackets, duck jackets, cloth and duck trousers, duck frocks, Guernsey frocks, check shirts, shoes, stockings, blankets, mattresses.
Entertainment and Seasonal Activities In the winter, when the lake was frozen, sailing activities were at a standstill. The ships were wintered by dismantling the riggings and covering the hulls of the ship with planks to keep off the snow and preserve the decks.

According to Ned Myers, “the winter lasted more than four months, and we made good times of it. We often went after wood, and occasionally we knocked over a deer. We had a target out on the lake, and this we practices on, making ourselves rather expert cannoneers. Now and then they rowed us out on a false alarm, but I know of no serious attempts being made by the enemy to molest us.” At other times in the year, there were still moments of repose and entertainment, but the sailors and commanding officers found that entertaining in the manner to which they were accustomed was more difficult in this frontier wilderness.

When the Oneida was launched on March 31, 1809, a ball was held which exemplifies the problems:
“Building a brig hundreds of miles from a ship-yard was a trifle compared to the attempt to give a ball in the wilderness. True, one fiddle and a half a dozen officers were something to open the ball with; refreshments and a military ball-room might also be hoped for, but where, pray, were the ladies to come from? The officers declared that they would not dance with each other. Ladies must be found …. At length, by dint of sending boats miles in one direction, and carts miles in another, the feat was accomplished; ladies were invited, and ladies accepted.”
http://www.hamilton-scourge.hamilton.ca

Captain John Prinyer & Prinyer’s Cove
The cove is named for Captain John Prinyer, who effected a daring capture of American soldiers in the War of 1812. Surrounding a larger group with only five men hidden in the bush, he convinced the Americans to surrender or be scalped by the natives, while the woods resounded with imitation war cries. During the War of 1812, American soldiers often made forays into British territory to capture enemy officers, who could then be exchanged for American prisoners of war. With that end in mind, thirteen Americans landed at Conner’s point, about two miles from Prinyer’s Cove. Outposts carried the news of their presence to Captain John Prinyer who set off with a small squad to capture them. Taking with him only four men and an orderly, he posted his forces in the woods with orders to give an Indian war cry at the appointed time. Prinyer walked into the American camp alone and demanded surrender. The Americans were astounded at his audacity and, not surprisingly, refused. Prinyer then calmly informed them that he had come only to save them from a scalping, and that if they did not lay down their arms, the Indians would do their worst! As the words left his mouth, the woods echoed with war whoops. The Americans hastily surrendered to Prinyer and were marched to Kingston, where they spent the rest of the war as prisoners.

Date Occurrence

1803 May 18 War resumed between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
and the First French Empire

1805 May 22 Essex Decision

1805 Oct 21 Battle of Trafalgar

1806 Apr 18 Nonimportation Act

1806 Nov 21 Berlin Decree

1806 Dec 31 Monroe-Pinkney Treaty

1807 Jun 22 Chesapeake-Leopard Affair

1807 Nov 11 Orders in Council

1807 Dec 17 Milan Decree

1807 Dec 22 Embargo Act

1808 Apr 17 Bayonne Decree

1809 Mar 01 Non-Intercourse Act

1809 Mar 04 President James Madison Inauguration

1809 Apr 19 Erskine Agreement

1809 Sep 30 Treaty of Fort Wayne

1810 Mar 23 Rambouillet Decree

1810 May 1 Macon’s Bill No. 2

1810 Aug 05 Cadore letter

1811 Feb 02 Trade with the United Kingdom closed

1811 Mar 10 Henry letters

1811 Nov 04 Twelfth United States Congress convenes

1811 Nov 07 Battle of Tippecanoe

1812 Apr 04 American Trade Embargo

1812 May 11 Prime Minister Spencer Perceval assassinated

1812 Jun 01 President James Madison’s war message

1812 Jun 16 Lord Castlereagh announces to Parliament Repeal of Orders in Council
War

1812

Date Occurrence
1812 Jun to Aug Baltimore riots

1812 Jun 18 Declaration of war by the United States against the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Ireland

1812 Jun 23 Finalized Repeal of Orders in Council

1812 Jun 29 Schooners Sophia and Island Packet taken by the British in the St.
Lawrence River

1812 Jul 01 United States doubles customs duties

1812 Jul 12 General William Hull’s army invades Upper Canada at Sandwich

1812 Jul 16 Skirmish at River Canard

1812 Jul 17 Capture of Fort Mackinac

1812 Jul 19 Attack at Sackets Harbor

1812 Aug 05 Skirmish at Brownstown

1812 Aug 08 General Isaac Brock embarks at Port Dover for the relief of Amherstburg

1812 Aug 08 Battle of Maguaga

1812 Aug 15 Fort Dearborn massacre

1812 Aug 16 Surrender of Detroit

1812 Aug 19 Capture of HMS Guerriere

1812 Sep 03 Massacre at Pigeon Roost

1812 Sep 06 Battle of Fort Wayne

1812 Sep 12 William Henry Harrison reinforces Fort Wayne

1812 Sep 14 Major A. C. Muir’s expedition at Fort Wayne

1812 Sep 21 Raid on Gananoque

1812 Oct 07 General James Winchester’s army arrives near Fort Defiance

1812 Oct 13 Battle of Queenston Heights

1812 Oct 18 Capture of HMS Frolic

1812 Oct 18 Capture of USS Wasp

1812 Oct 25 Capture of HMS Macedonian

1812 Nov ?? James Madison election

1812 Nov ?? British blockade South Carolina and Georgia

1812 Nov 09 Escape of HMS Royal George

1812 Nov 10 Commodore Isaac Chauncey attacks Kingston Harbour

1812 Nov 23 Americans retreat from Eastern Canada

1812 Nov 27 Americans attack Fort Erie Redoubts

1812 Nov 28 Skirmish at Frenchman Creek

1812 Dec 03 William Eustis resigns as Secretary of War

1812 Dec 03 James Monroe serves as Secretary of War

1812 Dec 09 Lieutenant Jesse Elliott captures Caledonia and Detroit

1812 Dec 18 Battle of the Mississinewa

1812 Dec 26 Great Britain blockades Chesapeake Bay and Delaware Bay

1812 Dec 29 Sinking of HMS Java

1812 Dec 29 Paul Hamilton resigns as Secretary of the Navy
1813

Date Occurrence

1813 Jan 12 William Jones serves as Secretary of the Navy

1813 Jan 22 Battle of Frenchtown

1813 Jan 23 River Raisin massacre

1813 Feb 05 John Armstrong serves as Secretary of War

1813 Feb 06 Raid on Elizabethtown

1813 Feb 16 104th Regiment commences march from Fredericton to Upper Canada

1813 Feb 22 Battle of Ogdensburg

1813 Feb 24 Sinking of HMS Peacock

1813 Mar USS Essex rounds Cape Horn preys on British whaling ships

1813 Mar 03 Admiral George Cockburn’s squadron arrives in Lynnhaven Bay

1813 Mar 19 Sir James Lucas Yeo appointed Commander in Chief of the Lake Squadrons

1813 Mar 27 Oliver Hazard Perry constructs Lake Erie fleet

1813 Mar 30 British blockade from Long Island to Mississippi

1813 Apr 01 Commerce raids begin in Chesapeake Bay

1813 Apr 06 Lewes, Delaware bombarded by British

1813 Apr 13 Capture of Mobile, Alabama

1813 Apr 15 Americans occupy West Florida

1813 Apr 27 Battle of York

1813 May 01 Siege of Fort Meigs

1813 May 03 Raid on Havre de Grace

1813 May 05 Sir James Lucas Yeo arrives at Quebec

1813 May 26 British blockade middle states and southern states

1813 May 27 Battle of Fort George

1813 May 27 British abandon Fort Erie

1813 May 27 Colonel John Harvey retreats to Burlington Heights

1813 May 29 Sir George Prevost and Sir James Lucas Yeo attack Sackets Harbor

1813 Jun 01 HMS Shannon captures USS Chesapeake

1813 Jun 06 Battle of Stoney Creek

1813 Jun 08 Skirmish at Forty Mile Creek

1813 Jun 09 Americans abandon Fort Erie

1813 Jun 13 British vessels repulsed at Burlington, Vermont

1813 Jun 19 Commodore Barclay’s squadron appears off of Cleveland, Ohio

1813 Jun 20 USS Constellation attempts capture of blockading vessels off Hampton, Virginia

1813 Jun 22 Battle of Craney Island

1813 Jun 24 Battle of Beaver Dams

1813 Jun 25 Attack on Hampton, Virginia

1813 Jun 27 Privateer Teazer (ship) blown up in Mahone Bay, Nova Scotia

1813 Jul 03 Capture of Sloops Growler and Eagle near Ile aux Noix

1813 Jul 05 Raid on Fort Schlosser

1813 Jul 08 Action at Butler’s Farm

1813 Jul 26 General Henry Procter quits the siege of Fort Meigs

1813 Jul 27 Battle of Burnt Corn

1813 Jul 31 Raid on Plattsburg

1813 Jul 31 Second occupation of York

1813 Aug 02 General Henry Proctor’s assault fails at Fort Stephenson

1813 Aug 04 Admiral Perry sails fleet into Lake Erie

1813 Aug 05 Dominica vs. Decatur

1813 Aug 07 Schooners Hamilton and Scourge founder on Lake Ontario

1813 Aug 10 Naval engagement ships Julia and Pert captured

1813 Aug 12 Capture of USS Argus

1813 Aug 30 Fort Mims massacre

1813 Sep 10 Battle of Lake Erie

1813 Sep 25 Capture of HMS Boxer

1813 Sep 27 Harrison lands in Canada

1813 Sep 28 Burlington Races

1813 Oct 05 Battle of the Thames

1813 Oct 16 Battle of Leipzig

1813 Oct 26 Battle of Chateauguay

1813 Nov 03 Battle of Tallushatchee

1813 Nov 04 Great Britain offers the United States peace negotiations

1813 Nov 06 General James Wilkinson’s flotilla runs past the batteries at Fort Wellington

1813 Nov 09 Battle of Talladega

1813 Nov 10 Skirmish at Hoople’s Creek

1813 Nov 11 Battle of Crysler’s Farm

1813 Nov 13 Skirmish at Nanticoke

1813 Nov 15 Funeral of General Covington at French Mills

1813 Nov 15 General James Wilkinson’s army goes into winter quarters

1813 Nov 16 British extend blockade to middle states and southern states

1813 Dec 10 Burning of Newark

1813 Dec 15 Skirmish at Thomas McCrae’s house

1813 Dec 19 Capture of Fort Niagara

1813 Dec 19 – 31 British destroy Lewiston Fort Schlosser Black Rock and Buffalo
1814
Date Occurrence

1814 Jan 22 Battle of Emuckfau

1814 Jan 24 Battle of Enotachopco

1814 Mar 04 Battle of Longwoods

1814 Mar 27 Battle of Horseshoe Bend

1814 Mar 28 Capture of USS Essex

1814 Mar 30 Battle of Lacolle Mills (1814)

1814 Apr 11 Napoleon abdicates French throne for the first time

1814 Apr 20 HMS Orpheus defeats USS Frolic

1814 Apr 14 United States repeals Embargo Act and Nonimportation Act

1814 Apr 25 British extend blockade to New England

1814 Apr 29 Capture of HMS Epervier

1814 May 01 General William Clark leaves St. Louis for Prairie du Chien

1814 May 06 Raid on Fort Oswego

1814 May 14 Skirmish at Otter Creek

1814 May 18 Lieutenant Colonel Robert McDouall relieves Fort Mackinac

1814 May 29 Skirmish at Sandy Creek

1814 Jun 02 General William Clark establishes outpost at Prairie du Chien

1814 Jun 28 Major William McKay’s expedition leaves Fort Mackinac

1814 Jun 28 USS Wasp defeats HMS Reindeer

1814 Jul 03 Americans capture Fort Erie

1814 Jul 05 Battle of Chippawa

1814 Jul 20 Trials at Ancaster Assizes

1814 Jul 20 Surrender of Fort Shelby

1814 Jul 12 Raid on Sault Ste. Marie

1814 Jul 25 Battle of Lundy’s Lane

1814 Jul 26 Sinclair’s squadron arrives off Mackinac Island

1814 Aug United States banks suspend specie payments

1814 Aug United States public credit collapses

1814 Aug 01 Schooner Nancy warned of Fort Mackinac blockade

1814 Aug 02 Siege of Fort Erie

1814 Aug 04 Battle of Mackinac Island

1814 Aug 08 Peace negotiations begin in Ghent

1814 Aug 09 Creek people sign treaty at Fort Jackson

1814 Aug 10 Raid on Stonington

1814 Aug 12 Capture of USS Somers and USS Ohio on Lake Ontario

1814 Aug 13 Part of Sinclair’s squadron arrives at Nottawasaga River

1814 Aug 14 Schooner Nancy destroyed

1814 Aug 14 British occupy Pensacola

1814 Aug 15 Assault on Fort Erie

1814 Aug 19 British land near Benedict, Maryland

1814 Aug 24 Battle of Bladensburg

1814 Aug 25 Burning of Washington

1814 Aug 27 British occupy Point Lookout, Maryland

1814 Aug 27 Retreating garrison destroys Fort Washington

1814 Aug 28 British capture Alexandria, Virginia

1814 Aug 28 Nantucket declares neutrality

1814 Sep 01 Construction commences on Penetang Road

1814 Sep 01 USS Wasp (1813) vs HMS Avon

1814 Sep 01 General George Prevost moves south toward Plattsburgh

1814 Sep 03 Capture of Tigress and Scorpion

1814 Sep 04 Battle of Plattsburgh

1814 Sep 04 John Armstrong, Jr. resigns and James Monroe becomes Secretary of War

1814 Sep 05 Skirmish at Rock Island Rapids

1814 Sep 06 Skirmish at Beekmantown

1814 Sep 09 Capture of Fort O’Brian

1814 Sep 11 Battle of Plattsburgh

1814 Sep 12 Battle of North Point

1814 Sep 12 British repulsed at Mobile, Alabama

1814 Sep 13 Bombardment of Fort McHenry

1814 Sep 13 Francis Scott Key writes the Star Spangled Banner

1814 Sep 14 Battle of Fort Boyer

1814 Sep 17 Counterattack at Siege of Fort Erie

1814 Sep 26 British squadron captures General Armstrong

1814 Oct 19 Battle of Cook’s Mill

1814 Oct 21 United Kingdom offers peace on bases of uti possidetis

1814 Oct 26 Raid through the Thames Valley

1814 Nov 05 Americans evacuate Fort Erie

1814 Nov 06 Skirmish at Malcolm’s Mills

1814 Nov 07 Andrew Jackson seizes Pensacola

1814 Nov 25 British fleet sail from Jamaica for New Orleans

1814 Nov 27 United Kingdom stops the uti possidetis

1814 Dec 14 British overwhelm American gunboats on Lake Borgne

1814 Dec 15 Hartford Convention

1814 Dec 15 United States adopts additional internal taxation

1814 Dec 23 British land their troops below New Orleans

1814 Dec 23 General Andrew Jackson surprise attacks British

1814 Dec 24 Treaty of Ghent

1814 Dec 28 United States rejects conscription proposal

1815

Date Occurrence

1815 Jan 08 Battle of New Orleans

1815 Jan 16 Capture of USS President

1815 Feb 01 Construction commences of Pentanguishene Naval Yard

1815 Feb 04 United States adopts second enemy trade law

1815 Feb 12 Surrender of Fort Boyer

1815 Feb 17 United States ratifies Treaty of Ghent

1815 Feb 17 United States rejects National Bank proposal

1815 Feb 20 Capture of Cyanne

1815 Mar 23 Capture of HMS Penguin


Deliver Us from the Liberation Ideology Delivery Room

Deliver Us from the Liberation Ideology Delivery Room

By Timothy Spearman

liberation

Recently, it has come to my attention that Benjamin Fulford is informing the world that the Dragon Society of China is replete with funds for setting the world free. Anyone who believes that the Chinese are going to be the instrument of our salvation is either asleep or delusional. How are 1.3 billion people immersed in a culture of greed and driven by a Darwinian survival of the fittest ideology supposed to liberate the rest of the planet? You must be kidding.

This is an endgame Trojan horse of the New World Order, aimed at offering the false hope of a liberation movement that will ultimately lead to our worldwide enslavement. Besides Fulford, there is Cobra and The Ambassador, both of whom are supposed to be involved in behind-the-scenes negotiations to bring back the gold standard and remove corrupt members of the “cabal” from key governmental posts around the world. Cobra is appropriately named given his status of government shill, cointelpro disinformer and no doubt a member of some Vatican alphabet soup intelligence agency. The same goes for The Ambassador. If they were authentic, they would not be doing what they are doing in secrecy using pseudonyms and hiding.

This Dragon Society rescue plan is Hegelian dialectics at its worst. The thesis is the Anglo- American-NATO New World Order and the Antithesis is the Chinese-led BRIC’s nations who oppose the New World Order and its array of western-based institutions like the World Bank, the IMF, etc., and who are now offering their alternative in the form of a Chinese-backed World Bank. Oh please yes, let’s jump on board with that one. I am sure the nation that enslaves its own population is certain to liberate the rest of us. Yes, that makes sense. The nation that serves aborted foetus soup to hard up men who can’t seem to raise the mast. The nation that steals organs from poor unfortunates like Falun Gong members who find themselves doped up in a hospital unit where they have their kidneys and livers removed before being stitched up and taken before the firing squad, their only crime that they chose the wrong country in which to pursue the spiritual path.

The Hegelian synthesis will be Communitarianism or some variant, which will be offered up as the ultimate End Times Endgame Trojan Horse. It will assume the worst elements of the Orwellian New World Order and the worst elements of Chinese totalitarianism and present it in the form of a Trojan horse liberation ideology called Communitarianism. This new ideology will have a new religion to go with it based on Gaia worship, in which the Earth and all animal species will be placed above the lowly human, which will be denigrated and robbed of all pride, reduced to the order of a hopeless serf, living under burdensome carbon taxes, which they are brainwashed to believe is for the greater good, and so they will shell out the extra tax dollars without question because they have been brainwashed by the indoctrination machine masquerading as an education system controlled by the Vatican banking establishment families like the Rockefellers who pump millions into education each year through the Rockefeller Foundation. The media then follows the educational brainwashing with the second wave of indoctrination through what they call TV programming. And we the sheeple are so brainwashed that we don’t even see that we are being told by the very word TV “program” that we are being programmed.

It reminds me of Communism introduced by Grand Orient Freemasons, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Karl Marx wasn’t even his real name. His actual name was Mordecai Levy. Keep in mind that Grand Orient Freemasonry was founded by the Bavarian Illuminati, which in turn was founded by the Jesuit priest Adam Weishaupt. Weishaupt founded the Bavarian Illuminati in the same year the United States was founded as a country. One of the premier Lodges was the Nine Sisters Lodge in Paris, France, which is known to have played a pivotal role in the French Revolution. We know that the Illuminati planned the French Revolution because a courier en route with the plans was struck dead by lightning in Bavaria, Germany. It sounds like fiction, but it is absolute fact. An Illuminati courier named Lanze was struck dead by lightning while travelling by horseback through the town of Ratisbon. When Bavarian officials examined the contents of his saddle bags, they discovered the existence of the Order of the Illuminati and found plans detailing the coming French Revolution. The Bavarian government attempted to alert the government of France of impending disaster, but the French government failed to heed his warning. Bavarian officials arrested all members of the Illuminati they could find, but Weishaupt and others went underground and could not be found.

The Nine Sisters Lodge was a Grand Orient Freemasonry Lodge, which was founded by the Bavarian Illuminati, and boasted an illustrious member, Benjamin Franklin, one of the premier leaders behind another rather famous revolution in world history, the so-called American Revolutionary War of Independence. In fact, the so-called Statue of Liberty was presented to him as a gift by the Nine Sisters Lodge. It was not the Statue of Liberty at all, but the goddess Isis, and on the plaque mounted on the statue are words right out of the Egyptian Book of the Dead spoken by the Goddess Isis: “Give me your tired and poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores. Send these the homeless, the tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the lighted door.” The Bolshevik Revolution would be more aptly named the Bullshit Revolution. Far from being the liberation ideology Marxism/Communism purported to be, it led to the enslavement of the proletariat it was supposed to liberate, along with the bourgeoisie, while murdering or sending the aristocracy into exile. Marx/Mordecai Levy was a Grand Orient Freemason agent working for the Bavarian Illuminati and the Vatican banking establishment family known as the Rothschilds. The liberation ideology took monopoly capitalism to the extreme, absconding with the money and transferring all capital to state control, denying people even the right to private property ownership.

It is desperately sad to see all these studious undergrads taking political science or writing papers from the Marxist school of thought on this and that, completely duped into believing it is a legitimate ideology, which they embrace in their naively idealistic way because their parents are well endowed enough to send them to college. Meanwhile, the kids are too privileged to see that it is all a ruse and fraud and are too brainwashed to listen to professors like me, believing the opinions of their prostituted parents over mine because they are conditioned to believe they are more successful simply because they are financially well endowed. Meanwhile, I am just a struggling academic and writer who no one listens to, so why should they? In fact, I would probably dismiss me as an absolute nut. Well there are a lot of other rather famous individuals that society didn’t listen to either who turned out to be right like Socrates, John the Baptist, Jesus, Mohammed, and the list goes on. Just so you know, Vladimir Lenin belonged to the same secret society, as did Trotsky. Like Mordecai Levy, better known as Karl Marx, Trotsky wasn’t his real name either. It was Bronstein. The ancestry of Lenin has been a subject of much discussion. Even the names of his parents are an object of dispute. One of the reasons for the obscurity of Lenin’s parentage is that Vladimir Lenin was evasive about this subject, feeling that his lineage was a private affair and should not be open to discussion. This begs the question of whether he was trying to hide something. In all likelihood, he was from a satanic pedigree most likely hailing from the Empire of Khazaria to begin with. In any case, Lenin seems to have spoken Yiddish as well as other languages, married Nadezhda Konstantinovna Krupskaya who is acknowledged to be a Judeo- Bolshevik. She probably had secret satanic Khazarian roots as well.

“Lenin” was the great-grandson of Moishe Itskovich Blank and the grandson of Srul Moishevich Blank. At his baptism, Blank changed his name and patro-nymic to Aleksandr Dmitrievich. Lenin’s so-called “Jewish” origin on his maternal grandfather’s side became, after his death, a matter of controversy between Lenin’s sisters and Stalin. In a letter to Stalin, Anna, Lenin’s elder sister, wrote: “It is probably no secret for you that the research on our grandfather shows that he came from a poor Jewish family, that he was, as his baptismal certificate says, the son of a ‘Zhitomir burgher, Moishe Blank’ and this fact could serve in combating anti-Semitism.” In fact, he would be Ashkenazi, and the roots of this sect would not be Semitic at all, but Khazarian. The Khazars are a mix of Aryan, Mongolian and other ethnicities and their empire was located basically where Georgia and Lithuania are today. Khazar is the origin of the words “Caesar”, “Kaiser” and “Csar/Tsar”, so it is not hard to imagine where these satanic Baal-worshipers ended up when it comes to the power structure of the west. The Khazars converted from Baal worship to Judaism at the time of the Crusades in order to avoid being exterminated by the armies of the Christians and Muslims who would have found their taste in a God rather inappropriate and would have sought their systematic extermination. They therefore migrated to Germany, where the wealthy upper caste of Khazarian society already had a duche or two and the rest is history.

As for the Bullshit Revolution that followed the Bolshevik Revolution known as the Chinese Communist Revolution let’s just say that Grand Orient Freemasonry had a hand in that too. Chang Kai Chek was a 33rd Degree Freemason as was Mao Tse Tung and both belonged to the Triads and the Heng Society. The same was the case in the American War of Independence and the American Civil War and the War of 1812. The leaders on both sides met in the same Lodges and were fellow Freemasons as was revealed in the book “The Temple and the Lodge” by the same authors that brought us “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail”. When are people going to wake up and stop falling for the fraud of liberation ideology? Communism, Socialism, Liberalism, Feminism, whatever guise it comes in it’s always the same agenda, a Trojan horse to make people believe they have been set free and to attack anyone who gives the slightest hint that it could all be a ruse. The ideology that is supposed to produce the better future that never arrives is adhered to by those in psychological denial until their generation all die off and then the next generation of suckers step up to the plate and are sold another false bill of goods. The new store has the same sign on it and the new boss is the same as the old boss.


Dr Andrew Wakefield The callous disregard On Vaccines Radio Interview

A Freedom Talk Radio Setv Exclusive Interview Vaccine Doctor Dr Andy Wakefield

Andy Peacher @ Author Timothy Spearman  2 peas in a pod-cast

2 peas in a podcast

Live at 3pm Uk Time 10am Eastern Usa Time. Sunday 15th Feb 2015

Author Timothy Spearman Interviews Dr Andy Wakefield

Dr Andy Wakefield reveals the inside story of desperate parents trying to help their autistic children, only to be labelled as abusers by social workers, medical professionals, and the courts.

Listen Live Click The Image Here

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/freedomtalkradiofreehosts/2015/02/15/andrew-wakefield-christinaengland-sallie-elkordy

thCA3V0IS0

???????????

Andrew Wakefield reveals the inside story of desperate parents trying to help their autistic children, only to be labelled as abusers by social workers, medical professionals, and the courts.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/26/texas-vaccinations-safety-andrew-wakefield-fear-elections

As the number of children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders grows each year, new discoveries and controversies arise. Andrew Wakefield explores many of these in his thorough investigation of the recent trial case of the “Arizona 5,” which destroyed an Arizona family. Two parents, with five children on the spectrum, were accused of Münchausen syndrome by proxy—a rare form of child abuse—and were ganged up on by physicians, child protective services, and the courts, who alleged that the parents fabricated medical symptoms in all five children. However, Wakefield now presents ample evidence that was disregarded and which would have proven the parents’ innocence.

Families affected by autism suffer great hardship and prejudice, particularly as they navigate the uncertain waters of diagnosis, treatment, and education. The shocking story of the Arizona 5 family delves into the tremendous challenges some parents have to face, especially if their views on how to treat the syndrome don’t align with the medical world’s standards. Wakefield also includes numerous studies and research trials that support the controversial yet significant roles that vaccines and diet play in autism, factors many medical professionals wrongfully dismiss.

http://www.callous-disregard.com/

With Special Guests

Christina England

christina england

http://vactruth.com/tag/christina-england/

https://www.facebook.com/christina.england.75

http://www.amazon.com/Shaken-Syndrome-Vaccine-Induced-Encephalitis/dp/1456719769/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1304402863&sr=1-1-fkmr1

Christina was born and educated in London, U.K. She left school to work in a children’s library, specializing in story telling and book buying. In 1978 Christina changed her career path to dedicate her time to caring for the elderly and was awarded the title of Care Giver of the Year for her work with the eelderly in 1980.
 After dedicating much of her spare time helping disabled children in a special school, she then worked in a respite unit in a leading teaching hospital.

 In 1990 Christina adopted the first of two disabled boys, both with challenging behavior, complex disabilities, and medical needs. In 1999 she was accused of Munchausen’s by Proxy after many failed attempts to get the boys’ complex needs met. Finally, she was cleared of all accusations after an independent psychologist gave both boys the diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder and ADHD as part of a complex tapestry of disorders. During the assessments it was discovered through the foster care diaries that the eldest boy had reacted adversely to the MMR vaccine.
 After taking A Level in Psychology and a BTEC in Learning Disabilities Ms. England then spent many years researching vaccines and adverse reactions. She went on to gain an HND in journalism and media and is currently writing for the American Chronicle, the Weekly Blitz and Vaccination Truth on immunization safety and efficacy.
 England’s main area of expertise is in researching the areas surrounding false allegations of child abuse. Her work is now read internationally and has been translated into many languages.
England has been a guest on Holy Hormones Honey — The Greatest Story Never Told! on KRFC FM 88.9 in, Colorado. She speaks at seminars worldwide and has been invited to speak in London and Canada in 2011.

Sallie Elkordy

sallie 3

https://www.facebook.com/sallie.elkordy

http://vactruth.com/tag/sallie-elkordy/

We all are activists on a given issue, but it is in degrees. How loud do we protest? How may people do we interface with on our chosen topic of activism? How hard do we strive to change the future for the betterment of our children and all humanity. TLB is proud to know, partner with and be associated with Sallie Elkordy in any fashion. Here is an individual who lives, breaths and dreams her activism … and that chosen subject is Vaccines.

TLB rants and rails constantly about the evil of vaccines, having published many articles and radio shows speaking to this blight, but Sallie is A REAL BOOTS ON THE GROUND ACTIVIST engaging herself daily in educating and physically influencing her community. From local political involvement to planned events and media, Sallie is one of the most active ACTIVISTS we have ever known and we can not sing her praises loud enough … although we will try!

What we present here is Sallie’s Call To Arms for New York City and indeed the world. Information on her special event is all included below as well as a great discussion we had the privilege to record with her. NYC you are under the gun and your children are being targeted … Sallie has taken up the sword for you … will you let her march alone ???


Time Is History by Timothy Spearman

Time Is History
by Timothy Spearman 
apollospear@yahoo.com

Time as we know it is measurement of the sequence of before and after measurements of the movements of bodies in space. Earth time, for instance, is based on the Julian calendar, which records the movement of the Earth around its orbital plane in relation to the sun. Our solar system similarly revolves around our galaxy and our galaxy around the greater universe. These time cycles are referred to as cosmology. What I would like to propose in this short paper is that we as a civilization are approaching the hour of midnight. We have reached the end of the cosmic day cycle. The minute and hour hand are approaching zero hour and the clock is about to be reset. Let us now examine what is setting alarm bells off at the midnight hour.
Astrophysicists have recently observed that the Milky Way has recently made room for another stream of stellar bodies, a crosscurrent sweeping arc across the constellation Ursa Major, more commonly known in North American culture as the Big Dipper. This new Milky Way stretches optically from just above the head of Leo the lion to the constellation Cancer the crab. It is as if someone poured a fresh batch of cream into the Milky Way. The new star stream stretches over 63 degrees, one-third of the northern celestial hemisphere.
The reason the star stream has escaped notice till now is because its individual stars are far too faint to see with the naked eye. This raises a question the astrophysicists who made the discovery seem to have missed: Why are these stars comparatively faint if they have become member stars of the Milky Way Galaxy? There is an answer to this. They are not stars. They are considerably smaller in size, which is why they appear comparatively faint in the backdrop of the Milky Way. They are a cluster of comets, asteroids and meteors. They are the forward scouts of an army of comet-like bodies known as the Oort Cloud making contact with our galaxy rather like an advancing storm front.
To capture this star stream, astronomers Carl Grillmair and Odysseas Dionatos used a clever combination of techniques to isolate the contrasting brightness of the new so-called star stream and the old. The so-called star steam is readily identifiable because these space objects are comparably inferior in size and brightness. In short, they are not stars and are much closer to our solar system than they appear.
Grillmair, a research scientist at the California Institute of Technology’s Spitzer Science Center inPasadena, believes the newly discovered star stream has emerged from an ancient globular cluster of stellar bodies. “What we can see of the stream is over 30,000 light-years long. It may actually be much longer, since we are currently limited by the extent of the survey data,” Grillmair was quoted as saying. “I would actually be somewhat surprised if the stream doesn’t extend completely around the Galaxy.”
This discovery, Grillmair notes, “gives new weight to a theory that the Milky Way may once have been swarming with thousands of giant star clusters.” Indeed, “there may be hundreds or even thousands of such stellar streams ringing our Galaxy. It’s possible that globular clusters start being stripped of their stars by galactic tidal forces as soon as they’re born. In that case, all globular clusters should have at least tiny tidal streams coming out of them, and I have actually found some.”
Grillmair believes that an observation of this kind of stellar tide can reveal a great deal about the distribution of dark matter in our Galaxy. “It’s galactic dark matter that holds the stream in its orbit, keeping its stars from escaping the Galaxy altogether.” In this case, the dark matter Grillmar is referring to is our sun’s companion star, which some have identified as Planet X and others as the planet Nibiru, a body of considerable gravitational force and power, which is literally holding a stream of comet-like bodies in its wake.
In time, astrophysicists will discover their mistake and realize that this is not a star stream at all, but a comet cluster, the boat wake of an intergalactic body of considerable size and gravitational force, drawn by our sun’s companion star, a brown star in fact. Picture a large ship dragging behind it a considerable wake and imagine this on an intergalactic scale. As the sun’s companion star draws nearer to our solar system, it will be illuminated by our sun. At that time, it will actually appear as if there are two suns in the sky.
Our galaxy and solar system is actually a timepiece made up of cogs and wheels. There are larger and smaller wheels in this timepiece. Our galaxy would be a larger wheel than our solar system, while our Earth would be a mere cog in comparison. The revolution of our Earth would take seconds compared with the cosmic hours of our solar system and the cosmic days of our galaxy. This field of study is known as cosmology.
At cassiopaea.org, researcher Laura Knight-Jadczyk and her colleagues believe they have channeled some vital information from highly advanced beings identifying themselves as the Cassiopaeans. Linda teaches in her “Wave” series that an intergalactic storm is headed this way in the form of the Oort Cloud and Photon Belt. This is the result of the sun’s companion star dragging a stream of comets in its wake rather like a dragon’s tail. This phenomenon occurs once every 306,000 years, equaling twelve processional cycles of the zodiac.
The processional cycle of the zodiac takes 25,600 years. It is caused by the Earth slipping on its polar axis one degree every 120 years. The zodiac signs, which stretch along a perfect horizontal plane at the Earth’s elliptic, actually shift 30 degrees every 2,500 years. It takes approximately 25,600 years for the zodiac to complete its cycle. Many people refer to the present age as the Age of Aquarius. That is because the cosmic clock is being reset at zero at this time, so that the entire zodiacal cycle of procession can begin again.This may very well be why there are references in the Book of Revelations to the “End Times” or the “Time of the End”, which possibly refers to the end of the zodiacal cycle of procession. We are now at the end of the Age of Pisces, with the clock reset and ready to begin in the Age of Aquarius. There have been twelve of these zodiacal cycles in the last 306,000 years, which means that we are at the end of the larger galactic cycle, when our solar system makes contact with the Oort Cloud, an event that only happens once every 306,000 years.This means that a larger, more protracted galactic cycle has been completed at this time.
Laura Knight-Jadczyk of cassiopaea.org is unequivocal about the fact that the imminent arrival of the Oort Cloud is like the arrival of a tidal wave or tsunami. Another analogy would be the approach of a storm front. The vibratory density or frequency of our solar system is being changed by the advancing storm. The Earth’s base resonance frequency or heartbeat will rise from 8 Hz to 13 Hz in a very short interval of time. The advancing tide or storm front is comprised of the Oort Cloud and Photon Belt. The effect would be like that of autumn frost. Some of the fruit of Creation will be ripened by the autumnal frost, while others will rot and drop from the trees. Our planet is a tree reaching autumn maturity. The fruit it supports on its branches will either ripen or drop from its branches amid the ripening frost of cosmic autumn.
It would be useful to compare the cogs and wheels of the galactic cycles to the cycles recorded in the Mayan calendar. According to Mayan calendar expert Ian Xel Lungold, the Mayan calendar is actually comprised of the interplay of two calendars, one 260-day “personal” calendar known as the Tzolkin and the other a 360-day astrological calendar called the Tun. The Mayans referred to their calendar as the “Eight Division Sky Place”. The Mayans believe that there are nine cycles analogous to a series of wooden salad bowls one inside the other.
The first of these Mayan calendar cycles began 16.4 billion years ago with the Big Bang and unfolded over a “seven-day” cycle similar to the seven-day Creation cycle described in the Bible. Our mistake was to suppose that the seven-day Biblical Creation cycle was at an end, far from it. It is still well underway. The second cycle of 820 years saw the creation of mammals.The next cycle, which began 41 million years ago, witnessed the advent of the family unit. Then some two million years ago, the tribal cycle began. After this, there followed the cultural cycle of 102,000 years ago. The National Cycle, which began 3115 B.C., saw the birth of the nation state in Egypt, when the Upper and Lower Nile cultures merged. The Planetary Cycle followed in its wake in 1755 A.D., where each day of the seven-day cycle telescoped into a mere 20 years, with generational change occurring over an interval of 20 years as sociologists have confirmed. In January 1999 began in earnest the cycle known as the Galactic Cycle that will last 12.8 years and see each day of the seven-day cycle taking just 360 days. On February 10, 2011 will begin the Universal Cycle, a 210-day Julian calendar day cycle, when each day in the seven-day cycle will be confined to a mere 20 days. Human consciousness will take a stellar leap at this time to 4th Dimension.
Compare the Galactic cycle of the Mayan calendar to the now complete zodiac cycle of procession lasting 25,600 years. Indeed, this completes the history of our Earth in galactic terms. Compare Universal Cycle of the Mayan calendar with the now complete 306,000 year cycle, where our solar system makes contact with the Oort Cloud and Photon Belt. Indeed, our place in the universe seems to have been firmly established at this time. We are beginning to know where our Earth and solar system are situated in the scheme of things. In Mayan terms, we are firmly establishing our “intention” and “aspect” as a civilization.The nine cycles of the Mayan calendar are still in play. The newer cycles are simply mapped on top of the older ones. The same process is unfolding in the cosmos as the cogs and wheels turn the clock of cosmology. Consciousness is evolving at an increasingly fast and furious pace till we merge with the Universal Consciousness on October 28, 2011. It is at this time that we will attain “conscious co-creation”. This is when everything becomes possible all at once, in all time and all place. Teleporting and time travel will then be possible. Particle physics has already succeeded in transporting matter through time and space. Time and space will cease to hold any boundary or constraint upon our movements. It is only a matter of time before time itself disappears and the 3rd Dimension is transcended. That is why the Mayan calendar ends in 2012. That is when the hourglass runs out and time ceases to hold any cognitive meaning. It is quite literally the Time of the End, the End Times, the end of time itself.Sources:
http://www.space.com
http://www.cassiopaea.org
Ian Xel Lungold at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5102269643236445484&q=Ian+Lungold

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCaaXHrTwDQ


Conspiracy Factualists

Conspiracy Factualists
by Timothy Spearman

apollospear@yahoo.com

The truth is a scarcer commodity than gold, so let us prospect for it with the same devotion as the prospectors of old and never relent. And once having sifted and separated it from its baser cousins safeguard and protect it as the precious keepsake it is.
When people think of epic lives, they usually call to mind figures of the past, assuming that greatness was confined to some other time, when men walked taller, conversed with spirits and angels and walked hand in hand with the gods. Confess in all seriousness that you aspire to walk in the footsteps of one of the greats and people will guffaw and issue a hearty laugh at your expense.
Who really does get the last laugh? It is doubtful that any member of the establishment will be able to hold his head up quite so high when the lies of millennia are exposed for what they are. For the first time, we will see that the establishment is really not that well endowed, which is why it has been trying to hide its secret parts for so long. Now that the raincoat has been rent asunder and the sky has opened to drench these scoundrels, we can expect that the lightning rod of divine judgment may not be far behind. The Eastern traditions tell us that gae-byuk and the Age of Kali is upon us. The West tells us that Armageddon is on its way. No bloody wonder.
One thing is certain. We conspiracy factualists will tell our story and the truth will get out. Even if names have been changed to protect the innocent, it is clear that there is nothing sacred about the establishment that has always hidden its decadence behind a veil of hypocrisy and deception. From the royal murders of Queen Elizabeth I, to the Jack the Ripper slayings orchestrated by Queen Victoria to the modern day cover up of the Windsor family’s murder of Diana, it is becoming more and more apparent that the corrupt Royal family-controlled Freemason organization has been behind centuries of royal bloody murder, including the murders of Gandhi and even the man we know as Shakespeare, which is why the Shakespeare Quarterly is located in Washington D.C., so the spooks can keep an eye on Shakespeare research to ensure that the lid doesn’t blow off the simmering pot of lies.
As for the Freemason-controlled establishment, you can see there is no justice when you can’t prosecute a lawyer or a judge or a professor because these fellow initiates of the craft protect each other.And since the university degree system is based on the first three degrees of Freemasonry—Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason—it is absolutely certain that those who do not curry favor with the top Freemason dogs in their departments will not obtain their higher degrees, and even if they do, will certainly not graduate from a prestigious Freemason academy like Harvard, Yale or Oxford because they didn’t tuck their napkins in properly and showed themselves to be disorderly by daring to contravene convention. The prospect of getting tenure track is absolutely out of the question because they have dared to have an original idea instead of quietly complying with the system of refined mediocrity. They would have been far better off refining their gift for wit to keep their colleagues well fed on the customary repast of droll nonsense than to have expended energy on experimenting with new dishes that no one has the nerve to try.
It is the sincere hope of conspiracy factualists that Skull and Bones University Yale, Freemason academy Harvard, and all the fascist New World Order academies of the global elite will be exposed for what they are and that their doors will soon be permanently closed in order to prevent them from closing more minds to the world of possibilities to be discovered by freer spirits. Investigative jounrlaists have the advantage of considerable worldly experience and travel, while academics continue to languish in the dark endorsing so much rot, while stinging the nostrils of the rest of us.
Let us hope that the conspiracy factualists get their facts straight and liberate humanity from the control matrix called higher learning so that we can build our own open-air spirit learning centers beyond the prison houses of modern day academia. Spirit learning would combine the study of history with spiritual science based on esoteric spiritual teachings. In this way, we could understand history through the study of cosmology, astrology and the grand cycles of time responsible for human development and evolution. Spirit learning would be the educational institution of the future. What we are now witnessing is the wheezing, coughing and shortness of breath that accompanies the last death throws of the old order we call higher education, which is actually lower learning directed upon the root chakra known as the maladhara.
It is all about mind control. Socrates was killed for corrupting the youth, so for that matter was Bruno, and very nearly Galileo and Copernicus. To erect a pillar of truth in an edifice of lies means that the truth will stand the test of time, while the rest of the corrupt edifice comes crumbling down around it. Conspiracy factualists are a pillar of truth that will stand tall long after the entire Freemason-controlled academic establishment lies in ruins. They have lied to us about Shakespeare for 400 years, Gandhi for a century, JFK and Vietnam for nearly half a century, the wars in Iraq for a decade and a half, the World Trade Center attack for five years, and AIDS, Ebola, Smallpox, and Anthrax for years and years. Who supports the edifice of lies? The Freemason-controlled academic establishment.
Why do you think your professors tell you not to read esoteric books and occult literature? It is because the non-mainstream is where the truth is. Where else would it be? You really didn’t expect them to tell you who really killed Lincoln and JFK did you? These intellectual prostitutes want to keep their jobs within the Freemason-controlled establishment. They don’t want to be left out in the cold, shivering under some lamppost reading Kafka. They want to stay by the fire in the professors’ lounge where it’s warm. It matters nothing to them that their privilege is the cause of millions of other peoples’ misery and want.
The depraved love to deprive. They thrive on it. It is their daily bread. Let us hope then that the facts unearthed by conspiracy factualists relegate these heartless souls to the cold were the cold-blooded belong. Maybe then they will learn something about the public trust they neglected to uphold when they are in the same state of misery and want with which they once afflicted the other nine-tenths of the population. Let us also hope that the halls of unlearning are converted into museums and libraries for more advanced learning instead of wax museums for the antediluvian dinosaurs currently occupying the vestal halls.


That Old Black Magic Has Us in Its Spell

That Old Black Magic Has Us in Its Spell
by Timothy Spearman

apollospear@yahoo.com
Today’s youth have been programmed to accept the New World Order of Satan just as the 60’s generation was programmed to accept the revolution that would usher it in. For them it was “the dawning of the Age of Aquarius” as the Hair musical announced.Speaking of his travels and meetings with people from other lands and cultures, Friedrich Nietzsche commented, “What one people called good, another people called evil.” We do not have a chance to judge the goodness of our customs unless we can compare them with the values of other lands. It is only when you travel that you are able to remove the rose-colored glasses of your youth and gaze on the practices of your own nation and people with uncolored vision. When I traveled to Europe, I could view North American culture through the eyes of Europeans. I had been deprogrammed. For the first time, I could see my culture through foreign eyes and I developed a dislike for some things I saw from my vantage point across the Atlantic. When I traveled to the East and lived in South Korea for 12 years, I could view western culture and civilization with Eastern eyes. The imposed Eurocentric view that western history was somehow more laudable and admirable soon disappeared as the cultural programming of my early life wore off.
In my youth, I spent hours listening to the rock ’n roll groups and progressive rock bands of the 60’s and 70’s in a hypnotic fog. Some of the lyrics fascinated me. Some I barely understood. Many were psychedelic and produced a feeling akin to a drug-induced reverie. It never occurred to me at the time that I was being hypnotized, brainwashed or mind-programmed as my mother maintained. It never dawned on me that the music industry could be controlled by music companies with affiliations to intelligence services engaged in MK-ULTRA-style mind control experiments through music. But then, I did not know then what I know now.
I now know that the All-seeing Eye of Lucifer, who George Orwell referred to as Big Brother, is keeping an eye on us all. Just look at the logo for British intelligence unit MI5 and you will see the same pyramid, missing capstone and All-seeing Eye you find on the Great Seal of the United States featured on the hind side of the American one dollar bill. Indeed, Lucifer, often represented by the sun gods of the ancient world, is watching our every move. The print, music, and film industries are dominated by the Luciferian Illuminati bloodline families who have engaged in occult practices and witchcraft for centuries. Indeed, the word ‘media’ is derived from Medea, where the Medes, the sorcerers and shamans of the ancient world met to perform arcane rites for the mind-control of their subjects. Is it merely coincidence? To those who dismiss conspiracy as a theory, it will always be coincidence, but then they are so somnambulant, they would sleep through an earthquake.
How many of the rock stars of the modern era have participated wittingly or unwittingly in the program to hypnotize the young into the service of Satan. The name of the rock group KISS, for example, is said to be formed of the anagram K.I.S.S. meaning Kids in Service of Satan.
The lyrics to Kate Bush’s song “Experiment IV” is deeply disturbing in light of the Montauk and MK-ULTRA mind-control programs of the British and American Illuminati-controlled intelligence services. It is clear from the opening verses that the story is intended to be autobiographical, whether fiction or otherwise. The narrator is obviously relating an experience from his or her past. There is no definitive evidence that the speaker is Kate Bush. However, given that she is a musician, the experience seems to be close to her. Do the song lyrics convey something that happened to her or someone close to her? You be the judge:We were working secretly
For the military.
Our experiment in sound,
Was nearly ready to begin.
We only know in theory
What we are doing:
Music made for pleasure,
Music made to thrill.
It was music we were making here untilThey told us
All they wanted
Was a sound that could kill someone
From a distance.
So we go ahead,
And the meters are over in the red.
It’s a mistake in the making.From the painful cry of mothers,
To the terrifying scream,
We recorded it and put it into our machine.Note also that the experience is told in the past tense as if recalled from memory. Did Kate Bush participate in MK-ULTRA-style experiments on behalf of the British or American military? If she did, then this is a very cleverly disguised autobiographical song. To the unassuming or those not in the know, it would appear to be a song with a science fiction theme. However, there is just one problem with that analysis. Science fiction tales are normally told in the future tense.
For those unfamiliar with the MK-ULTRA program, it is said to have been a joint operation of the Anglo-American intelligence services based on the mind-control experiments undertaken by Nazi scientists during the war. Researchers such as Noam Chomsky maintain that many of these Nazi scientists were spirited out of Nazi Germany at the end of the war as part of the joint American and British intelligence operation known as Project Paperclip. Nazi operatives such as Joseph Mengele carried on business as usual with mind-control and other experiments of horror in Brazilian rainforests and other locales in Latin America. Mengele purportedly changed his name to Dr. Green and was responsible for programming many mind-control subjects of the MK-ULTRA project. David Icke’s interview with Arizona Wilder recorded on a videotape titled “Revelations of a Mother Goddess” provides chilling testimony on the subject.
Along with these experiments were others coordinated by the Tavistock Institute in London to devise means of programming the populations of the world through mind control techniques developed by the intelligence services of the western world. The aim was to perfect the techniques of the Nazis by using subliminal imaging in the mind. The human mind is only able to register 32 frames per second in film. However, the unconscious mind can pick up far more, so it is these subliminal images, which are invisible to the conscious mind, that are picked up by the subconscious. Slow the film down and you can actually see the subliminal imaging.The same technique was employed in the music industry with powerful effects. The Tavistock Institute would then conduct surveys in other countries to gather data on the effectiveness of their programming.
We speak of TV and radio ‘programs’. Indeed, television does have a programming effect. When you think about how television was first introduced as wholesome family entertainment and how through slow covert means has become a corrupting influence in the home, you realize the entire programming effort has been conducted surreptitiously and with great stealth. Once the hearth of the home not unlike the fireplace of the 19th century, the television has evolved into the most insidious psychological programming instrument in world history. Who are the modern day Medes, the techno-shamans and sorcerers of the post-industrial age? They no longer meet in Medea but control us through the ‘media’. They meet where witches have convened in covens for thousands of years, in tree groves like Hollywood and Pinewood Studios. As Ella Fitzgerald once sang so eloquently, “That old black magic has me in its spell.”


I’m Not Paranoid, Am I?

I’m Not Paranoid, Am I?

by Timothy Spearman
apollospear@yahoo.com

If the leaders of this world really wanted peace, we’d surely to God be doing better than we are now. What is the explanation for elite bodies convening at Bilderberger, IMF, World Bank, and UN conferences ostensibly to pursue policies of security and peace only to move us closer to conflict and war? Are they really meeting for the purposes outlined in their briefs or is there a reason IMF organizers look for more and more remote conference venues? I recommend instead of Outer Mongolia or Timbuktu, they choose a lunar landing for the next conference and since their policies are ill-matched to the needs of the majority of the world’s citizenry, they might consider setting up shop on the dark side of the moon and staying there. I don’t intend anything malicious or mean-spirited by this modest proposal. I really mean it. If the Illuminati gods perceive themselves as an elite body of individuals, superior and of a caste inviolable and unassailable, perhaps they should endeavor to keep their bloodlines clean by pushing off and leaving the rest of us mere mortals to fend for ourselves on the planet the Creator saw fit to hand down to us.
I’m all for sharing, don’t get me wrong. I’m just as happy as the next fellow to have a stranger dine at my table. But if he has the audacity to deny me sufficient elbow room and hogs the potatoes, I get a little chagrined. I’m not inclined to put up with some absentee landlord monopolizing my annual yield, making off with my potatoes and causing my family to go hungry. And this in essence is the nature of the IMF and GATT treaties signed into being by the world’s landlords.And now the absentee landlords are denying our farmers the right to even plant their own seed in the spring. Amazing as it seems, suicide seeds or terminator technology has been widely disseminated by Monsanto, famed war crimes manufacturer of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War. Now, I’m not one to complain. Normally, I’d encourage people to render unto Caesar the things that are his, but this is not about paying a mere tribute to Rome. This is our daily bread for Christ’s sake. And while we can’t live on bread alone, you can’t exactly live without it either. No, frankly, my heart is not entirely into relinquishing control over my daily bread and handing it over to Uncle Sam. Not that he has bad manners particularly. I mean normally he’s quite forthright about explaining why he’s trespassing on other people’s land. It’s just that his motives for doing so aren’t quite as clear cut as they once were. And I’m not altogether sold on him blackmailing my government into agreeing to whatever foreign policy is flavor of the month by telling our farmers we might not have a ready supply of seeds in the spring.
As for school administrators and teachers force-feeding kids Ritalin and other pharmaceutical goodies, I can only say that the nutty old man you used to fear would be handing out poison candy on Halloween is now on your school board. Incredibly, parents seem not the least bit worried about 5-in-1 vaccine shots being administered to their three-month-old infant.The fact they post on the bulletin board a recommended timetable for this prescription of induced autism, nervous system dysfunction and early death gives me the utmost confidence in my neighborhood school giving my child the best education for my tax dollar. I’m not in the least worried about my child’s mind being filled with useful facts or better still harmful misconceptions. Instead, I’m filled with the confidence that my neighborhood teaching professionals do their homework and research their subjects so thoroughly that they consistently get their facts right, so right in fact that they are in complete line with the Illuminati-controlled governments in charge of the Global Cleanse 2000 initiative to reduce the planet’s population by at least 3 billion. It’s far more important that we should agree with our public servants, since they are there to serve us, than show the slightest dissention or disapproval. We are teaching professionals after all whose sworn duty it is to turn our children into obedient, complaint and upstanding citizens, who like any good cow will bow their heads, knuckle under and go to the slaughter house without the least protest.
The one plus in all this is the war though, the one they call the war on terrorism. I’d say it’s going quite swimmingly really. I mean, when it was first launched, the object was to catch Osama. We didn’t get him so we went after his al-Qaeda minions. When we couldn’t round them up, we sent our cowboys in to corral the Taliban. And when we couldn’t get them, we started blowing up innocent civilians. The plus side is that as the casualty numbers went up, it become obvious that we must have picked off a few Taliban and al-Qaeda agents along the way. Fortunately, we employed smart bombs to reduce the collateral damage, but since the smart bombs were in the hands of our commander and chief and his equally smart boys in the field, the smart bombs didn’t have quite the accuracy we would have normally counted on. Anyway, we couldn’t really catch anyone in the end. Like wild horses, they proved a trifle ornery and a little hard to corral, so we went after the oil instead. The other bonus of course is that no one will really escape because Afghanistan and Iraq are so littered with depleted uranium dust from DU-laced tomahawk missiles and bombs that everyone in the region has had their life expectancy trimmed by at least three decades including our good old boys. When asked how our commander and chief thought he’d be viewed by posterity, he purportedly said, “It doesn’t matter. We’ll all be dead in a hundred years anyway.” He’s probably right, so there’s nothing to worry about anyway.
Amazingly, it was suggested I was paranoid in a radio show interview the other night. Interesting isn’t it that the very people who accuse you of being paranoid because you imagine conspiracy to be real rather than a theory fail to realize that, through the use of language, they embrace a conspiracy of exclusion, ostracism, alienation and expulsion themselves. Like most members of what is called civilized society, they are unwitting co-conspirators who engage in duplicity, backstabbing, and ostracism without the least cognizance of what they are doing because they feel morally justified by what has become established convention. Anyone who does not embrace consensus reality and uphold the status quo is clearly disaffected and dysfunctional and should be put on Ritalin or Prozac immediately, so that if they’re not completely mind-controlled, they soon will be. They use the conspiratorial language of “you don’t belong” and call it a theory. Well, folks I call that denial, and that’s not a river in Egypt, however much those in De Nile would like you to believe so. “Paranoid” conjures up images of a crazed nutcase that endangers the peace and sanctity of the home and might even cause you to have a bad day. No, we mustn’t allow such people to mess up our day, or God forbid, enter the public discourse. The lady who is not paranoid clearly had the right to tell me I was, even though she is the one feeling threatened not me. I know, I know, I’m delusional for having a rapier wit and a razor sharp intellect, but then so was Voltaire.


No Sympathy for the Devil

No Sympathy for the Devil

By Timothy Spearman

When the Rolling Stones wrote “Sympathy for the Devil,” they envisioned a figure that had been around orchestrating events since the time of Jesus down through the wars and revolutions of the modern era. The Stones were right of course. The Illuminati secret societies have manipulated the New World Order of Lucifer into being. Indeed as the Stones say. And I was ’round when Jesus Christ / Had his moment of doubt and pain. Made damn sure that Pilate / Washed his hands and sealed his fateIn the ancient world, the Medes met in Medea to perform their magic rites. It was an early form of psychological warfare in essence. The Medes or sorcerers would deploy powerful hexes in the form of mantras, thought suggestion, drug-induced programming, talismans, amulets, symbols, etc.These spells could be used to control the minds of followers or enemies alike. Spell the word right and you would cast the right spell. As the word ‘media’ implies, the modern day media is controlled by silicon sorcerers and their apprentices that inherit much from the ancient Medes. The idea that writers and artists exercise free speech and enjoy freedom of speech has never been true. Research has shown that most of our illustrious writers and artists of history have belonged to secret societies or their intelligence agency counterparts, which held their artistic careers to ransom. A glance at the list of ‘navigators’ found on the Priori of Sion list dug up by the researchers of “The Holy Blood and Holy Grail” shows that Leonardo da Vinci, Sir Isaac Newton, Victor Hugo, Claude Debussy, and many other illustrious geniuses of European history were Grand Masters of this secret society, and that some of them belonged to more than one.While attempts have been made to discredit the ‘navigator’ list by Pierre Plantard and others as a hoax, there are more reasons than not to regard it as authentic. The Freemasons have long asserted that the author of the Shakespeare plays was a Freemason. Masons wrongly assert that Sir Francis Bacon wrote the plays. Considering they were responsible for the deception that has caused most of us to believe that the commoner Will Shaksper wrote the plays for the last 400 years, their information can hardly be trusted. The man who wrote the plays was Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, a secret agent employed by the crown and a member of Bacon’s secret writing societies Fra Rosi Cross and the Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet.He was paid 1,000 pounds a year as the Lord Chamberlain of England to stage theatrical performances for Queen Elizabeth. One of the greatest writers in history was a slave of the Freemason-controlled establishment and was no freer than the Hollywood artists of today controlled by the Freemasons and their American intelligence affiliates.
Research has shown that Mozart did not enjoy any freedom of speech either and was compelled to write operatic works exalting Freemasonry before the masses, “The Magic Flute” notwithstanding. There have even been suggestions that he was murdered for revealing well guarded Freemason secrets in “The Magic Flute”. The fact that he was buried in a pauper’s grave is compelling evidence for this, since being denied a proper Christian burial was a serious punishment reserved for those who betrayed the Order. There is evidence to suggest that our modern pop icons may be no freer than the great artists of history. Much has been made of the subliminal satanic messages found in the “backward masking” of the LPs of rock bands of earlier eras. In fact, Kate Bush’s song “Experiment IV” seems to be a subtle reference to the MK-Ultra programs she may have been forced to partake in, which according to the lyrics of that song, seem to have involved the use of music “to kill people from a distance.”
Much has been said about the Beatles’ Abbey Road album, mainly because of suggestions that Paul was dead. On the album cover, we see the four musicians crossing a crosswalk. Paul appears barefooted in black and there were suggestions that he may have been killed and that the Beatle’s were subtly informing the public of his death through their album cover. However, we need to be reminded that John is dead, not Paul. They are crossing a crosswalk remember. Think of the passion of Christ and the stages of the cross.The album cover is symbolic of John’s future death, not Paul’s. John leads the procession in pearl white, God’s colors. He is followed by Ringo in a cassock representing the presiding priest. He is followed by George Harrison dressed as the gravedigger and Paul as the corpse awaiting burial. When we consider that Abbey Road Records produced most of the greatest song material of the era, an album of the same title is suggestive. “Abbey Road” and “crosswalk” have interesting resonances. An abbey is a temple. Hiram Abif, hero of Freemason legend, died in the Temple of Solomon. Sol-om-on is not the name of the Isrealite king, but a synthesis of the three names for the sun god in Hebrew, Egyptian and Indian just as Israel stands for Is-Ra-El, representing the sun god triune of ancient Egypt, Isis, Ra and El. According to the legend of Hiram Abif, the purported architect of Solomon’s Temple was confronted by three assassins called the Three Juwes, Jubilo, Jubila, and Jubulum by name, who wished to know the secrets of the Master Mason Degree. When Hiram Abif refused to divulge the secrets, the three ruffians attacked him, administering blows in turns with the architectural devices they carried as weapons. John and the three musicians represent Hiram and the Three Juwes. Remember that it is John who died, not Paul.Forget the media spin and the myths of popular culture. It is well known by those who lived through the Beatles’ era that Charles Manson was heavily influenced by the Beatles. The “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band” album cover, said to show the face of Aleister Crowley, represents the devil or Satan as the band leader. “Pepsi” is the Egyptian word for Satan. “Dr. Pepper” and “Sgt. Pepper” would be variations on the theme. Manson believed that the Beatles were modern day prophets that were giving him messages through their music and found a multitude of hidden meanings in their lyrics. He would also use his interpretation of chapter 9 of Revelation to support many of his beliefs. It may even be the case that Manson’s MK-Ultra programmers may have even used Beatles’ song lyrics to trigger Manson’s programming.This would grant them plausible deniability as it would merely appear that Manson’s response to the Beatles was delusional and psychotic. The haunting repeated Beatles’ mantra found on the White Album “Number 9, Number 9, Number 9” has puzzled many a code-breaker. In ancient pagan numerology, the number 9 is the number of the circle, which was a symbol of infinity or immortality. Take the zodiac, for instance, which comprised a 360° circle. The numbers 36 and 360 add to 9 if their components are separated and added: 3+6=9 3+6+0=9. Much medieval magic revolves around the number 9. It was considered one of the most potent of numbers because it was composed of the all powerful 3 that representing the Trinity: 3 + 3 + 3 = 9. The number nine was sacred to the pagan goddess of death, the underworld and Hell, the realm of the dead. The hidden occult meaning of “number 9” could not be more disturbing in its implications.
Charles Manson taught his disciples that they were living in the Age of Armageddon, which he referred to as “Helter Skelter.” It may be that Manson took his cue from the revolutionary propaganda of the Beatles. John Lennon of the Beatles was quoted as saying, “Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn’t argue about that: I’m right, and I will be proved right. We’re (the Beatles) more popular than Jesus now…”
A decade after the Tate-LaBianca murders, it was reported that satanic “backward masking” had been detected in some Beatles’ songs. This article appeared in the San Antonio Light, Monday, February 1, 1982.The headline read: “Backward masked Satan promos found on some Rock’n Roll Records.” “Backward masking” consists of the subliminal technique of concealing messages. Such masking was not only found in Beatles’ songs, but also in those of other rock groups, such as Led Zeppelin, Queen, Black Oak Arkansas, and the Electric Light Orchestra. Messages that can only be heard when the song track is played backwards are implanted in the songs. This is done by placing the speed of the turntable in neutral position, then spinning it by finger backwards at sufficient speed to pick up the voice. The Led Zeppelin song, “Stairway to Heaven,” played backwards purportedly contains the words: “My sweet Satan…. the one who will be sad who makes me sad, whose power is Satan.” When played forward, the lyrics say, “Yes, there are two paths you can go by; but in the long run there’s still time to change the road you’re on.”
The Black Oak Arkansas song, “The Day Electricity Came to Arkansas,” allegedly contains the backward message, “Satan, Satan, Satan, he is god.” Although the Beatles make no overt references to Satan in their White Album, the satanist Manson was deeply influenced by the song track “Revolution No. 9”. Charles Manson believed the Beatles were telling him what to do through their songs. Manson’s disciples also believed that the Beatles’ songs were speaking to Manson, especially in the White Album.
On the White Album is a song called “Honey Pie,” The song lyrics state, “Oh honey pie, my position is tragic / Come and show me the magic / Of your Hollywood song.” The song goes on to say: “Oh Honey Pie you are driving me frantic / Sail across the Atlantic / To be where you belong.” In January and February of 1969 following the release of the White Album, Manson and his disciples tried to contact the Beatles through several telegrams, letters, and telephone calls to England to invite the musicians to join them in Death Valley, but their attempts to contact the Four Lads failed.
The Beatles song “Revolution 9” contains a segment that, played backward, has another message. The repetition of “number nine, number nine” in reverse says, “Turn me on dead man.” The lyrics to “Revolution 1,” as shown on the jacket insert, reads: “You say you want a revolution / Well you know / We all want to change the world… / But when you talk about destruction / Don’t you know that you can count me out.” However, when you listen to the record, after the word “out” you hear the word “in”. Later on in the song, the lyrics say, “You say you got a real solution / Well you know / We’d all love to see the plan.” This is most probably a reference to the “Order Out of Chaos” motto of the Luciferians and their Freemasonry. Their Hegelian problem-reaction-solution agenda to advance the New World Order requires destruction or chaos out of which they cause a reaction that requires a solution, which is greater order and totalitarian control. “The plan” probably refers to the “Great Work of Ages” otherwise known as the New World Order of Lucifer that is intended to replace the Old World Order of God.


A Who’s Who of Who’s Controlling Whom

A Who’s Who of Who’s Controlling Whom

by Timothy Spearman
apolospear@yahoo.com

Remember the song by the rock band The Who called “Who Are You?” Pay close attention to the lyrics the next time you listen. The lyrics are really quite revolutionary and subversive. Maybe that’s why I like it so much.
Who has authoritative knowledge? Do you? Do I? Socrates, one of the very greatest minds, insisted that he knew nothing. Contrast this with today’s know-it-all intellectuals who assume they know everything. It is our observation that scholarship itself should come under the microscope, since the scholarly community has found itself in error on a host of subjects over the centuries. Just to offer some early examples: Columbus had to discover the New World to promote his new paradigm. Meanwhile, Copernicus withheld his discoveries for thirty years before daring to propose his heretical heliocentric solar system to the monastic pedants of his day. Luckily, he managed to escape the purifying rituals of the Inquisition’s torturers by dying.
Copernicus was then forced to recant for reiterating the theory; Bruno was burnt to a cinder for reiterating the already reiterated; Galileo was martyred for being the patron saint of an already accepted truth; Descartes was mercilessly persecuted by the monastic scholars of Holland only to narrowly escape trial by fire; As for Shakespeare, the scholarly community has embarrassingly overlooked the obvious, that the plays could not have been written by the commoner who purportedly wrote them. The real writer was in fact an intelligence operative who needed a front man to hide behind. The real author was a nobleman, a courtier connected with HMSS and closely associated with Francis Bacon. William Shakespeare was a pen name. The man who sat for the famous portrait of William Shakespeare by John Taylor is not from Stratford. That man is Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford. A comparison of this portrait and the portrait of Edward de Vere by Marcus Gheeraedts shows this to be the case.
In the last century Percey Bysshe Shelley was expelled from Oxford for merely suggesting that there might not be a Creator in a paper called “The Necessity of Atheism”. And just to catalogue some of the things the scholarly community has gotten wrong in the 20th century, they found themselves in gross error over the psychoanalytic theories first proposed by Freud. Geographers and geophysicists could not have been more in error concerning continental shift and Earth plate tectonics, a discovery they attempted to suppress for over fifty years through their notoriously criminal conduct. Indeed, I have something of an axe to grind with the corrupt academic establishment that is notoriously in cahoots with the corrupt political and legal establishments, each of which vaccinates the others to enhance each other’s legal immunity.
Later in the century, social scientists found themselves committing a litany of errors in the realm of geopolitics, misjudging the situation in Vietnam, East Timor, Central and South America, the Balkans, and a host of other places that came under the gun of Uncle Sam, NATO or the UN’s so-called security forces. In addition, they were largely in error about Cuba, the Bay of Pigs, the JFK coup d’etat, the Nixon coup, the Panama Invasion, the Gulf War, the Balkan conflict, the rigged election of 2000 and 2004 and of course 9/11 and the war on terrorism. Noam Chomsky, one of the world’s most revered scholars, still believes Oswald did it. But then Noam insists there is no evidence 9/11 was an inside job. Where have you been Noam? And how can anyone forget AIDS, Ebola, SARS, and Anthrax?
Professor Jacob Segal alleges that HIV was manufactured at Fort Detrick, a biological weapons research facility in Maryland. Segal states that the P4 High Security laboratory at Fort Detrick created a deadly hybrid biological agent by splicing the Visna virus – a deadly disease that kills sheep and HLTV-1 – and the Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus together. He goes on to state that the virus was tested on inmates of the prison system who volunteered for experimentation in exchange for early parole. Because symptoms did not show up within six months, the prisoners were released. Many of them were homosexual, so the virus quickly spread within the gay communities of New York and San Francisco. What is worth noting here is that BBC and other journalists traced the Anthrax that was sent to several prominent people in the United States to, you guessed it, Fort Detrick. Clearly Fort Detrick is the common denominator in the ugly deception perpetrated by the U.S. intelligence services. Did I say intelligence services? What an oxymoron that is. How about the Third Reich’s Gestapo? George Orwell said it best in 1984.

 

In the vast laboratories of the Ministry
of Peace and in the experimental stations
hidden in the Brazilian forests, or in the
Australian desert, or on lost islands of
Antarctic, the teams are indefatigably at
work. Some are concerned simply with
planning the logistics of future wars;
others devise larger and larger rocket
bombs…others search for new and
deadlier gases, or for soluble poisons
capable of being produced in such
quantities as to destroy the vegetation of
whole continents, or for breeds of
disease germs immunized against all
possible antibodies…(184)

 

Could you repeat that last bit again, George? Did you say, “disease germs immunized against all possible antibodies?” Thanks George. It appears they’ve done it. By Jove you were right George, right about everything except the 1984 bit. AIDS hit the headlines before 1984. But pretty good job on the whole George. You and Edgar Cayce would have made a good team.
Given the appalling record of oversight and the skill they exhibit at missing the obvious, it amazes me that anyone should be amazed by the attenuated vision, myopia and ignorance of the tunnel-vision pedants that stake their claim over the archives only to collect more dust from neglect and redundancy than the books they pour over in their corner of the archives.
How is all this possible? What if there was an overarching organization that controlled the dissemination of knowledge, information and just about everything else? Well there is. What is the university degree system based on? The first three degrees of Freemasonry: Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason corresponding with Bachelor’s Degree, Master’s and Ph.D. This means that a secret establishment controls the whole show. Subversive anti-establishment thinkers get weeded out before they reach the top of the pyramid.
What about banking? Who created banking? The Knights Templar. Who are they? The Masons under an older name. How did they do it? By lending gold. How much gold? More than they had. What’s that called? A con game. Today they call it fractional reserve lending. Ever notice how a bank looks like a Masonic Temple? Ever notice the Cathedral arches in the WTC Twin Towers? The Templar Masons designed the Gothic cathedrals too you know. And how about the WTC Twin Towers? Why twins? Because they represent the pillars of a Masonic Temple: Jachin and Boaz, meaning Strength and Foundation. You mean to tell me that the New York Financial District is a Masonic Temple? Yep! How about the check? Comes from the coded number system invented by the Templar Knights. Gold is heavy. You don’t want to carry that all the way to the Holy Land. Here, take this check. It’s good for 3,000 ducats of gold.
Where is London’s legal district located? Temple Bar. Ah, so that’s where the term “Bar Exam” comes from. You guessed it. What about the Temple part? Well, how about the Knights of the Temple or the Knights Templar? And how about the Masonic Temple? You’ve got to be kidding me. Nope.
Check out the police uniforms. Ever notice those black and white squares on the police caps? Well those black and white squares are on the floor of every Masonic Temple. Know what it means? Nope. It means we control the light and the dark forces. We control both sides. We control both sides in wars and cold wars. We control the Capitalists and the Commies, this ideology and that. We control the North and the South, this army and that. We control both sides. We control all sides. That way we control the outcome we call the New World Order.
Who controls the World Government? Who controls the UN? You guessed it.Look at the logo for the UN. 33 rectangular squares representing the longitude and latitude degree lines of the Earth and also the 33 Degrees of Freemasonry. And the laurels of Pallas Athena surrounding the globe? Well, Pallas always presented her heroes with laurels. So what? Well, she’s the patron goddess of Freemasonry. And how about all those pagan gods and goddesses all over the Ivy League university campuses. Well, the Freemasons secretly worship the pantheon of pagan gods and goddesses of the ancient world. How about the world religions? How about the oil companies? How about the multinational corporations? Well, yes I’m afraid they created and control those too. Still have your doubts?


A Resolution to the Shakespeare Authorship Problem

A Resolution to the Shakespeare Authorship Problem

By Timothy Spearman

This paper was originally inspired by a discovery the author had made concerning a similarity in the likenesses of the subject featured in the portrait of William Shakespeare by John Taylor and that of Edward de Vere by Marcus Gheeraedts. The conjecture of the author of this paper is that the subject featured in the Taylor portrait of Shakespeare is the same man shown in the Gheeraedts portrait only advanced in age by some fifteen years and therefore with a receding hairline resulting from middle age. The hypothesis is that, having lost caste in the Elizabethan Court for writing subversive plays that failed to meet their sole objective of serving the propaganda aims of the Court in addition to causing other scandals, including an affair with the Queen’s handmaiden, Anne Vavasor, Edward de Vere, the seventeenth Earl of Oxford became increasingly defiant of the establishment, adopting a bohemian lifestyle and dress, growing what was left of his hair long, allowing his courtier goatee and mustache to grow into a full but scruffy beard, while sporting an earring and commoner’s dress.Further study resulted in the discovery that the author was a Freemason initiated into the Higher Degrees of Freemasonry and a British intelligence operative under the cover of a diplomat, who visited the courts of Europe on several occasions. The life of privilege led by Edward de Vere, seventeenth Earl of Oxford, so dwarfed the life of the mediocrity from Stratford-upon-Avon as to eliminate him altogether from the authorship candidacy. Why, thought the author of this paper, would the Stratford man so clearly support the ideology of caste and privilege, as evidenced by his early plays in particular, when such an ideology disqualified him from upward social mobility? In addition, it did not make any sense whatsoever that he had such a breadth of knowledge gleaned from having participated in aristocratic sports, while studying jurisprudence, medicine, and several languages, in addition to traveling widely, when none of these privileges would be open to the commoner from Stratford.The author of this paper therefore thought to shake his spear at the ignorance of a naïve world blinded by four hundred years of incalculable oversight. The author hopes the findings here presented will sufficiently shake a spear at the serpent of ignorance that he might seek safe haven in the same hole he crawled out of. We also hope, but by no means hold our breath, that the academic world that has been so spitefully unkind to our person will offer a warmer reception to this our “spear-shaking” than it has in the past.It is also hoped that those who gaze upon the countenance of Edward de Vere will have the vision to see the resemblance in the two portraits this study has herein brought to the world’s attention. What’s in a name? In the name “William Shakespeare”, there is a great deal. One would assume then that, as a name of great import, the author would at least endeavor to adopt a uniform spelling of his name and a uniform signature to go with it. Yet, of the six signatures found attached to documents ascribed to the man from Stratford, each displays a different spelling and style of handwriting. Why would this be when literate men of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries developed personalized signatures just as people do today? As evidenced by the signatures extant, the man from Stratford whose name was most commonly spelled Shakspere seems not to have developed a consistent signature.1 Baptized Gulielmus Shakespere, he would go on to be known in other documents by William Shaxpere, William Shackespere, Willelmus Shackspere, William Shackspere, William Shakespeare of orthodox spelling, William Shackspeare, Willelmus Shakespeare, Willelmum Shakespeare, Willielmi Shakespeare, Willelmus Shackspere, Willelmus Shakspeare, Wyllyam Shaxpere, Mr. Shakespere, etc. These names appear on records ascribed to the man known by the name most commonly spelled William Shakspere from Stratford-Upon-Avon. It makes no sense whatsoever that a man of such importance would not endeavor to standardize the spelling of his name as well as his own signature for simple purposes of identification if nothing else. Indeed, the fact that there seems to have been no effort on the part of the Stratford man to do so is where a good part of the confusion rests and has contributed in no small degree to the authorship problem itself.Some of the scholars who examined these records initially decided that some of these documents belong in the biography of some other man of that name. Scholar Sydney Lee, for example, concluded Anne Whately became engaged to another of the numerous “Shakespeares” who then abounded in the diocese of Worcester. Then, in two articles entitled “Other William Shakespeares,” Charles William Wallace established that one of the documents pertaining to malt sales should be reassigned to a man other than the Stratford man.2 So the already scant record on the Stratford man, a record showing no evidence of any literary life, may be reduced still further by the fact that many of the “Shakespeares” referred to under different spellings in diverse documents may in fact be different men.The question that immediately springs to mind is why is the record so blank on William Shakspere of Stratford? Why is there such abject poverty in terms of documentation, including written records, letters, manuscript materials, etc.? Bear in mind that the question is asked of the man deemed to be the greatest author of English letters. How can this be, when significantly more documentation has been found on contemporaries of lesser note such as Ben Jonson and Michael Drayton? Michael Drayton, a much less revered contemporary and fellow poet from the same town, has exactly the kind of documentation associated with him one would expect to find in the great bard’s record, including letters, direct references to works, a brief description of his physical appearance, evidence of revision and polishing of his works, evidence of attending educational institutions, etc. Why the comparative destitution in the Stratford man’s record? And why is there no surviving evidence that these two famous poets from the same town had known each other or even met?3We might just as well ask: What’s in a face? The sheer abundance of disparate visages appearing in engravings and paintings of the bard indicate that hardly anyone seems to have had a clear impression of what the man actually looked like. In the opinion of the author of this paper, there is only one true likeness of the author of the plays and sonnets, and that is the portrait of Shakespeare painted by John Taylor circa 1610. While the painting by Taylor has been given the date 1610, this date must be erroneous since the subject of the painting, Edward de Vere, died in 1604. While many will be surprised by this claim, since the Stratford man is known to have died in 1616, I contend that it is not the Stratford man who is the subject of the Taylor portrait.The subject is indeed the man posterity knows as William Shakespeare, but that man is not from Stratford-Upon-Avon, nor was his real name William Shakespeare. The portrait is in fact a likeness of Edward de Vere, the seventeenth Earl of Oxford, who wrote the plays under the pen name, William Shakespeare. The man shown in the Taylor portrait bears a striking resemblance to a well-known portrait of Edward de Vere painted by the Dutch painter Marcus Gheeraedts. An approximate date for the Gheeraedts’ portrait is given as 1586. The marked difference of course is the fact that the man appearing in the Taylor portrait is bald, while the portrait of de Vere shows a man with a full head of hair.The reason for this is that the subject in the Taylor portrait is some fifteen years older and has gone bald with advancing years, while the de Vere portrait depicts the same man in his prime and with a full head of hair. The subject featured in the Taylor portrait is in fact the same man shown in the de Vere portrait only fourteen to fifteen years older, since the de Vere portrait shows the same man at approximately 36 years of age, since an approximate date of 1586 has been given to the painting. The author of this paper believes the Taylor portrait depicts de Vere at approximately fifty years of age, four years before his death in 1604. The dating of the Taylor portrait would, therefore, have to be reassigned to circa 1600, ten years earlier than that assigned by orthodoxy. Included in this paper is a composite photo comparison of the subjects featured in the two paintings. Both the aging process and unkempt appearance is eliminated in the painting of the bard with the aid of Photoshop, restoring his full head of hair, while eliminating his earring and long hair. Before and after photo analysis reveals that the middle-aged bard bears a striking resemblance to Edward de Vere featured at the age of 36, suggesting that Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, is the bard writing under the pen name William Shakespeare. (See the accompanying composite portrait comparisons of before and after likenesses).The authorship controversy has not been helped by the fact that irresponsible researchers have deliberately misled lay people and scholars alike by making grossly erroneous claims. Perhaps the best example of this is Gareth and Barbara Lloyd Evans’s grievously errant contention in their Companion to Shakespeare:

We no more about the life of Shakespeare, both in
terms of facts and of rational conclusions that they
suggest, than of any other Elizabethan dramatist…
Documents relating to Shakespeare’s activities,
including letters to him and material relating to
his family, are extant in quantity in the Shakespeare
Centre records office at Stratford upon Avon.4

Note that the Evans’s tell us that there are many “letters” extant to Shakespeare, that is “letters” in the plural, misleadingly implying that there are many such letters extant. The truth is, however, that there is only one letter on record addressed to William Shakspere, the man from Stratford, and it was never delivered.5 How can so-called scholars mislead the public so irresponsibly? No wonder the authorship question has never been adequately resolved. With such gross distortions of the actual facts, many of the misinformed are discouraged from even embarking on the quest for the true author due to the erroneous weight of evidence tilting the balancing scales in favor of orthodoxy.The surname “Shakespeare,” it should be noted, appears as the hyphenated name, “Shake-speare,” in the dedications to Venus and Adonis and Lucrece. Of the thirty editions of the Shakespeare plays published before the First Folio of 1623, in which authorial attribution was given, the name appeared hyphenated in fifteen of these cases. This suggests that the name is of the order of a sobriquet or nom de plume. The only legitimate case for hyphenating an Anglo-Saxon name would be in the case of two noble families brought together through the bonds of marriage and who wished to retain their family peerage mutually by preserving both names in a hyphenated surname, but in such cases, the family name appearing after the hyphen would be capitalized. The “speare” in “Shake-speare” is most definitely not capitalized, leaving little doubt that it is pseudonymous.6What’s in such a name? If a dramatist were to assign himself a pen name, would it not be apropos to take on a name that canonized him as a dramatist in some kind of homage to his art form? True, he would be under no obligation or compunction to do so. Still, it would be no less fitting. This being the case, it will constitute no shock to learn that the name “Shake-speare” or “Shakespeare” is derived from Pallas Athena, patron goddess of the Greek theater in Athens, who was nicknamed “Hasti-Vibrans” in Latin, meaning the “Spear-shaker”. The reason assigned to the sobriquet for both the goddess and the bard is that Pallas was known for shaking her spear at the serpent of ignorance and vice.7 In Greek mythology, Pallas Athena was the goddess of wisdom, philosophy, poetry, and the fine arts. Her original name was Pallas…from palein, meaning ‘shake’. Athens, the home of Greek drama, was under the guardianship of Pallas, the spear-shaker. The phrase, “The spear of Pallas shake,” can be read in a line of verse from a collection of Shakespeare’s poems of 1640.8Pallas always shook her spear at ignorance, which is what the poet himself is doing, shaking his spear at the ignorant mass of humanity for believing the ridiculous ruse that an ignorant rustic from the country could be a claimant to the throne of the immortal bard, this a mere stand-in, substitute, or understudy brought in to play the part of the bard so that the true author could remain behind the scenes hidden from view. Pallas Athena also wore the “helmet of invisibility,” which rendered her invisible each time she drew the visor down over her face.The bard is, therefore, wearing Pallas’s helmet of invisibility, as his true identity is concealed behind a mask or visor. Ben Jonson recognized the true significance of the sobriquet when he wrote of Shakespeare’s “true-filled lines,” that “In each of which, he seems to shake a lance, /As brandished in the eyes of ignorance.”9 How did Jonson know about the Pallas Athena connection unless he was in on the plot? Gabriel Harvey, a fellow at Trinity College, Cambridge, in an address to the queen during one of her visits to the university, paid tribute to Oxford as a prolific poet, and one whose “countenance shakes spears.”10 Why the strange reference to the Shakespeare-Pallas Athena sobriquet once again?
Why was the Bard so inspired by Pallas Athena that he chose to adopt her nickname? From whence did this influence arise? It is known that, while studying law at Gray’s Inn, the young Francis Bacon formed there a secret literary society called “The Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet”. The “Helmet of the Order” was of course the helmet of Pallas Athena, the helmet that occulted her and rendered her invisible. She was Francis Bacon’s patron goddess since his early experience with the French Academie on the Continent whose patron was Pallas Minerva, the same goddess under her Roman designation.The candidate for initiation within the order swore allegiance to Pallas Athena and to uphold her ideals, banishing the serpent of ignorance to the remotest corners of the civilized world in order to spawn an age of enlightenment and a literary renaissance capable of enlightening the world. The initiate would then kiss the helmet, after which it was placed on his head. Just as the Helmet of Pallas was said to make the wearer invisible, so the initiate would become an invisible of Bacon’s invisible college or mystery school and secret literary society. In his right hand simultaneously was placed the spear of Pallas, which he was sworn to shake with valor at all the serpents of ignorance and vice to be found in the world.11 The author of the Shakespeare plays, who the author of this paper believes was Edward de Vere, would have worn the helmet of one of Bacon’s ‘invisibles’ within the Order and would have been sworn to write in secrecy. Given the political import of many of the plays including, Hamlet, Othello, and Macbeth, the author would have been forced to write under a pen name and to conceal his authorship. The Shakespeare Sonnets would also have to have been written under a pseudonym since they contained the story of the author’s invisible or secret life.The visor of invisibility Pallas Athena drew down over her helmet to render herself invisible makes sense of an otherwise obscure scene from Act V, scene I of Henry the Fourth, Part Two, in which Davy speaks of one William Visor to his master Justice Shallow, a name of obvious allegorical import, “I beseech you, sir, to countenance William Visor of Woncot…” (Henry IV, Part II in Shakespeare’s Complete Works, Collins Classics, V.I, ll.38, 39) To this entreaty, Shallow replies, “There is many complaints, Davy, against that Visor. That Visor is an arrant knave, on my knowledge.” (V.I.ll.40-42) “Woncot” is a probable allusion to Wincot. Wincot is where Will Shakspere’s uncle and aunt lived and is clearly a name of Warwickshire designation.The gratuitous exchange has no relevance to the play and makes no sense at all unless it is to point to Will Shakspere of Stratford as the “visor” of Pallas Athena’s helmet behind which the true author of the plays may remain obscured.12 In other words, Will Shakspere from Stratford is the front man behind which the true author, Edward de Vere, can conceal his identity as the bard out of political and social necessity. To substantiate the point, the Earl of Oxford’s wife died in 1612. In her will, she stipulated that a certain sum be laid aside as a provision “to my dombe man.” Was this the continuance of an allowance to be paid to the Stratford man, Will Shakesper, to continue in his capacity as the front man?13 He certainly was mute in terms of composition and functioned as a kind of “dummy” of the real bard, a mere stand-in or double.Alfred Dodd believes that Bacon wrote under many masks including, Thomas Nashe, Thomas Watson, Robert Greene, and John Lyly. In fact, amazingly, if it can be believed, Dodd claims that even Edmund Spenser was a mask employed by Bacon to conceal his authorship. According to Dodd, it was in July 1580 that a clerk, who worked for the Earl of Leicester, named Edmund Spenser, left to take up a job in Ireland. Before he left, Francis paid him for the use of his name in the publication of certain writings.14 According to Dodd, John Lyly is just one of the masks under which Francis Bacon wrote secretly.Using the initials I.L., since the author of John Lyly’s work often signed himself Ihon Lillie, the author wrote a commemorative poem about Edward de Vere. It must be remembered that it was common practice in the age of Elizabeth for authors to suppress their names and substitute initials or a pen name.15 This probably resulted from the fact that Elizabeth had enforced such strict censorship laws and mete out such severe penalties on violators. The author of the poem here in question attributes the valor Edward de Vere exhibited in the naval battle against the Spanish Armada to the inspiration provided by his patron goddess, Pallas, whom he refers to by name:

De Vere, whose fame and loyalty hath pierced
The Tuscan clime, and through the Belgike lands
By winged Fame for valour is rehearsed,
Like warlike Mars upon the hatches stands,
His tusked Boar ’gan foam for inward ire,
While Pallas filled his breast with warlike fire.16

It seems rather odd that Pallas Athena, patron goddess of the Greek theater in Athens and goddess of wisdom sprung from the brow of Zeus, should be placed on board Edward de Vere’s ship at the time of battle. One could imagine the goddess of war or some other goddess being at his beck. Why of all goddesses it should be the goddess of the Greek theater inspiring him in time of battle is extremely odd, unless of course Lyly, or Bacon, if indeed Lyly was a Baconian mask, knew Pallas was de Vere’s patron goddess. If de Vere’s patron goddess was Pallas Athena, then it would not be surprising for him to borrow her attributes, since it was custom for noblemen to employ pen names to conceal their authorship at this time anyway. It must be remembered that the nobility seldom attached their names to works of poetry and especially dramatic works, as it was considered beneath their dignity to publish lines of verse or plays.Why would Edward de Vere employ a pen name? Recourse to pen names and anonymous authorship by men of noble rank is not unique to Elizabethan England. Precisely the same practice was employed by the nobility in diverse cultural milieu. In Korea, for example, two classical operatic works were composed anonymously by persons of the noble class, Shimjong Jeon and Chung-hyang Jeon, and for precisely the same reasons.Gentleman of rank in the Choson Dynasty were forbidden to attach their names to dramatic works and works of poetry. It will come as no surprise then that the same practice was adhered to in another feudal society halfway around the world at the time of Queen Elizabeth. Any nobleman writing poetry for publication or dramatic works for the theater would have lost caste immediately.The threat of losing caste was so real for the author of the Shakespeare plays that it is even alluded to in a poem by John Davies, a contemporary, appearing in the Stationer’s register of 1610. What becomes abundantly clear is that the entire poem is written in the past tense, which suggests that its import is addressed to a poet already dead. Edward de Vere was of course already dead in 1610. He is known to have died in 1604 in fact. Will Shakspere of Stratford, however, would not be referred to in the past tense in 1610, as he still had six more years of life to live. The other thing to notice about the Davies’ poem is the fact that the Will. Shakespeare referred to is most definitely of the noble class, which the Stratford man was most definitely not, and has lost his noble rank as a consequence of his having performed in his own plays, a definite no-no for a nobleman:

To our English Terence, Master Will. Shake-speare.
Some say (good Will) which I, in sport, do sing,
Hadst thou not played some Kingly parts in sport,
Thou hadst been a companion for a King;
And been a King among the meaner sort.
Some others rail; but, rail as they think fit,
Thou hast no railing, but, a reigning Wit:
And honestly thou sowst, which they do reap;
So, to increase their stock which they do keep.17

The import of the poem is that “Shake-speare”, the name once again appearing hyphenated, indicating it is pseudonymous, is a nobleman who lost rank by performing on the stage. So addicted was he to the stage that he would take to the stage secretly under his pen name, but was probably recognized by the Queen’s omniscient ‘Gestapo’ or secret service and reported.“Thou would have been a companion for a King,” is an allusion to his status as an earl. The title “count”, being equivalent to “earl” in the English caste system, is in fact designated as a “companion to the King” in terms of peerage. “And been a King among the meaner sort” refers to the fact that de Vere had played kingly parts for the theater, which would in fact be seen as “a meaner sort of King”, since the theater was considered low and common.There is in fact a well-known portrait of Edward de Vere extant showing him in costume as King Henry. The last two lines of the poem indicate that the bard labors without gain, since others profit from his work. The implication seems to be that certain individuals reap the benefits of his work and keep the profits for themselves. At the same time that a nobleman who has lost caste is implied, so an allusion is also made to the man from Stratford known as Will Shakspere. The clue for this occurs in the allusion to “our English Terence”.The English Terence refers to the Roman poet Terence, a slave who became a free man and a well-known poet. The man summoned from Stratford to act as the front man and to double as the bard, in order that the true author could conceal his authorship of the plays is here implied.18

To corroborate the above account, where a tribute is given to an author already dead, when the man from Stratford is still living, we have the first edition of the sonnets published in 1609 under the title, Shake-speares Sonnets. Once more the name appears hyphenated implying a pen name, but there is something else this time. This kind of locution is usually reserved for one who is already dead. The byline should read, “By William Shake-speare” for a living author. Then, there is the text of the dedication, which refers to “our ever-living poet.” Implying once again that the author is no longer living. “Ever-living” is used in memorials to signal the fact that someone dead lives on in the memory of the living.19

Is the Elizabethan social ethos and the question of caste the only issue? Are there other reasons for adopting a pen name? The author of this paper would like to suggest that there is. Edward de Vere would have a rather good reason for adopting a code name were he a spy or agent of the British Crown. And the evidence strongly supports the fact that he was. The most convincing piece of evidence for his status as a secret agent can be found in a Privy Seal Warrant issued by the Queen on June 26, 1586. The warrant calls for a grant to be issued to the Earl to the tune of 1,000 pounds a year, a sizeable sum equivalent in today’s terms to three times the Prime Minister’s salary. The reason for the grant is not given, but what is abundantly clear is that the Queen issues instructions at the end of the letter that no accounting for the expenditure is required by the Exchequer, standard practice in the case of secret service money:

Elizabeth, etc., to the Treasurer and Chamberlains
of our Exchequer, Greeting. We will and command
you of Our treasure being and remaining from time
to time within the receipt of Our exchequer, to
deliver and pay, or cause to be delivered and paid,
unto Our right trusty and well beloved Cousin the
Earl of Oxford or to his assigns sufficiently
Authorized by him, the sum of One Thousand
Pounds good and lawful money of England. The
same to be yearly delivered and paid unto Our
said Cousin at four times of the year by even
portions: and so to be continued unto him during
Our pleasure, or until such time as he shall be by
Us otherwise provided for to be in some manner
relieved; at what time Our pleasure is that this
payment of One Thousand Pounds yearly to our
said Cousin in manner above specified shall cease.
And for the same or any part thereof, Our further
will and commandment is that neither the said Earl
nor his assigns nor his or their executors nor any
of them shall by way of account, imprest, or any
other way whatsoever be charged towards Us,
our heirs or successors. And these shall be your
sufficient warrant and discharge in that behalf.20

What the last two sentences mean is that no accounting of expenditures implied by the grant are to be required by the Exchequer, which is tantamount to saying that the transaction is secret and classified.

The scholar B.M. Ward claims that this is the usual formula followed in the case of secret service money. The Earl had no known office other than his place on the Privy Council, so there is no good reason for the payment in terms of official function or capacity. There is no evidence of any official assignment calling for such an annuity. The Earl never left the country following the issuing of the grant which he received beginning in 1586 when he was 36 until the time of his death in 1604 at the age of 54.21

For so large an amount to be paid out of the secret service fund, it had to have been used for purposes of state, Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn arguing that it was used for England’s first Ministry of Propaganda. The purpose of the propaganda ministry would be to educate the English people, most of whom could not read, through a medium of education analogous to today’s Hollywood, opening their eyes to the world around them, while acquainting them with a revisionist history that would have them bursting with pride.

And while the state was busily taking charge of the theater for purposes of state propaganda, it was simultaneously clamping down on the printing presses, the Queen authorizing Archbishop Whitgit and the Privy Council to draft legislation to strictly regulate them. A Star Chamber decree was duly authorized on June 23, 1586 calling for stricter governance over the printing press, with a list of pains and penalties for violations of the censorship laws. No publication could be released without first receiving approval from the Archbishop of London.

The success of the Queen’s Propaganda Ministry cannot be underestimated for its power to instruct the uneducated masses on their history, enlightening them on their place, and furnishing them with so thorough a knowledge of rewards and punishments they would have known what would invite praise and censure. A more vivid description of the state propaganda apparatus the theater guilds served could not be found than Thomas Heywood’s aptly named Apology for Actors, which is none other than an apology for the theater arts being held subordinate to the state to which the performers themselves had been held ransom:

Plays have made the ignorant more apprehensive,
taught the unlearned the knowledge of many
famous histories, instructed such as cannot read
in the discovery of all our English chronicles;
and what men have you now of that weak
capacity that cannot discourse of any notable
thing recorded even from William the Conqueror,
nay from the landing of Brute, until this day?
Being possessed of their use, for or because
plays are writ with this aim, and carried with
this method, to teach their subjects obedience to
their king, to show people the untimely ends of
such as have moved tumults, commotions, and
insurrections, to present them with the
flourishing estate of such as live in obedience,
exhorting them to allegiance, dehorting them
from all traitorous and felonious stratagems.22

Is it mere coincidence that history plays remained in vogue from 1586 until the conclusion of the Anglo-Spanish war? Chronicle plays were very popular, the pseudonymous author Shakespeare, Marlowe, and others writing several, many of which were original, but some of which Oxford apparently permitted his apprentices to revise and reshape. At the cessation of the war, the demand for such plays from the state and the appetite for them from a people weary of war dried up. Considering how scarce money was at the time, and how careful the Queen had to be with funds in providing for the war effort, it is clear that, if not the Queen, the state apparatus, had to be sufficiently pleased with the propaganda produced for the Elizabethan stage to maintain Lord Oxford’s annuity until the time of his death.

Why would the Earl receive such an annuity? If he is not being paid for his official duties, what is the reason for so exorbitant a salary? Is he being paid for covert operations of some kind? Once again, the evidence would support such a hypothesis. Christopher Marlowe and Ben Jonson both faced prosecution for libelous and blasphemous allusions made in their plays, great risks for commoners to take without protection from higher personages, institutions or organizations. In May 1593, the Star Chamber prosecuted Christopher Marlowe for “lewd libels” and “blasphemes”. Certain papers of Thomas Kyd were found keeping company with Marlowe’s manuscripts. Testifying under duress on the rack, Kyd protested that, “My first acquaintance with this Marlowe rose upon his bearing name to serve my Lord, although his Lordship never knew his service, but in writing for his players.” It is one of the most tantalizing mysteries in the Marlovian biography question that Kyd omits to identify the mysterious lord of whose household he had been a member for nearly six years.

Six years places Kyd in the services of the mysterious lord back to the end of 1587, from his time of arrest in 1593. The Spanish Tragedy attributed to Kyd on the strength of a single reference is assigned by scholar Edmund Gosse to the period 1584 to 1586. Researcher E. T. Clark believes that the mysterious lord under whose supervision Kyd worked for six years, and for whose players Marlowe wrote, was none other than Lord Oxford. It is more likely to have been Sir Francis Bacon, since the author of this paper believes that both Kyd and Oxford were working under Bacon as ‘invisibles’ in his secret literary societies, which in essence were employed as compartments within the state propaganda apparatus.

The period of Kyd’s employment nevertheless coincides with the period in which Oxford’s annuity of 1,000 pounds commences.23 It also happens to coincide with King Philip II of Spain’s rage over the manner in which he was portrayed on the Elizabethan stage. The Venetian ambassador of Spain even reported on King Philip’s complaints concerning the Elizabethan stage to the Signory:

But what has enraged him much more than
all else, and has caused him to show a
resentment such as he has never displayed
in all his life, is the account of the
masquerades an comedies which the Queen
of England orders to be acted at his expense.24

What King Philip’s complaint, as related by the Spanish ambassador, makes explicit is the fact that the plays had some effect in rousing a reaction from the foreign courts. It is at this time that we begin to hear about the so-called “university wits”. Researcher E. T. Clark believes that Oxford’s apprentices turned out dozens of plays under his supervision, including chronicle plays, revenge plays, Senecan plays, most of them conceived to sustain the people’s morale during wartime. Since his early twenties, Oxford had served as a patron for other writers, so it was easy for him to slip into his new role as the master of young propaganda initiates.25 Clark maintains that Oxford turned to recent graduates of Cambridge and Oxford, and even to those at the point of graduating, who showed promise as writers, to assist in the task of writing state propaganda for the stage. Clark also contends that it was Oxford who discovered Marlowe’s dramatic gifts, encouraging him to write Tamburlaineto portray as a ruthless conqueror the personage of King Philip.27

According to the great Baconian scholar, Alfred Dodd, in 1579 and by 1580, Sir Francis Bacon had founded the secret literary societies Fra Rosi Cross and The Honourable Knights of the Helmet, the latter named in honor of his patron goddess Pallas Athena who always whore the ‘helmet of invisibility’.

This was all part of Bacon’s effort to achieve “The Universal Reformation” or English Renaissance in literature. Fra Rosi Cross and The Honourable Knights of the Helmet were invisible colleges or mystery schools, whose initiates wore Pallas Athena’s helmet of invisibility and were known as ‘invisibles’. The founding of these societies began at Gray’s Inn law school, the Grand Patriarchs of the orders being Bacon’s personal friends such as Gabriel Harvey, his old literary professor, and Fulke Greville, a well-known poet. Bacon’s cousin, Sir Philip Sydney, and Sydney’s sister, Lady Mary, Countess of Pembroke, would also be on the planning committee. And according to Alfred Dodd, “He would have the warm support of Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, also a poet.”28 Was Oxford a poet or a concealed poet, one of the invisibles? Dodd has provided strong evidence that Oxford and Bacon were associates and that he was even in on the planning of these invisible literary societies? Was he also a member? It is very likely. He was referred to as a poet and playwright and yet he stopped writing poetry at least under his own name at a very young age, while strangely none of his plays survive under his own name.

Kid, Jonson, Marlowe, Lord Oxford as Shakespeare and others were working together as a syndicate of writers under the patronage of Sir Francis Bacon, whose source of funding came from the Queen, which is one explanation for the great flowering that occurred in Elizabethan drama and the unity of style found among the major playwrights of the time. Similarities found between the Shakespearean and Marlovian works, which have hitherto been explained away by charges of plagiarism and even the speculation that Marlowe was covertly writing the Shakespeare plays following a staged death in a tavern brawl, can now find a more logical explanation. What is more likely is that the similarities in styles found among the playwrights resulted from them working closely together as part of the same secret literary society and propaganda ministry, writing and sometimes sharing plays to meet deadlines assigned to them either by Bacon’s propaganda ministry or the Court. Similarities found between Shakespeare’s early historical dramas and Marlowe’s Edward the Second, published in 1594 as Marlowe’s, which orthodoxy acknowledges as proof of the greater author’s debt to the lesser, can instead be explained by the reverse scenario, in which Marlowe, as a initiated member of Fra Rosi Cross, is apprenticing under de Vere, the author known to posterity as William Shakespeare. What is more likely than Shakespeare being the plagiarist of the inferior dramatist’s work is that de Vere turned one of his own early plays over in draft form to his apprentice Marlowe to complete, perhaps in order to meet some pressing deadline assigned by their patron Sir Francis Bacon or the court.29

Othello would have been one of the plays that caused King Philip such strong offense. “Moor” was a racial slur for Spaniard at this time, and as the murderer of Brabanto’s daughter, Othello would have seen himself reflected in the Moor, since he was rumored to have arranged the murders of his third wife, Elizabeth of Valois and the Princess of Eboli, claimed to have been his mistress. With the production of Marlowe’s Tamburlaine probably launched a year later in 1587, Philip probably would have been further slighted. Envisioning himself as the master of land and sea, Tamburlaine boasts:

Even from Persepolis to Mexico
And thence unto the Straits of Jubalter,
Where they shall meet and join their force in one,
Keeping in awe the Bay of Portingale,
And all the ocean by the British shore;
And by this means I’ll win the world at last.30

Small wonder that the Spanish King would be so put out by the way he was represented on the Elizabethan stage. Why it should come as any surprise to anyone that the plays should be used for state propaganda is truly amazing. We have to remember that a feudal system existed at this time in which each lord served an overlord. No man was free.

To exhibit the kind of genius shown by Edward de Vere would have been more of a curse than a blessing. His talents would have been most certainly seized upon and used on behalf of the Queen, the Court and the state. Why should it be any surprise that Jonson, Marlowe, and the man posterity knows as Shakespeare were writing state propaganda on behalf of the crown? Is not the same the case today with Hollywood writers turning out state propaganda on behalf of the American government? Just as the English nobility are depicted as the bastion of heroism in the Shakespeare plays, so is the American hero a star shining with unrivalled brilliance in the firmament, witness Air Force One or Impact, both of which feature hero presidents. Examine any of the films starring Clint Eastwood, Sylvester Stalone, Harrison Ford, and innumerable others in which the American maverick is the model hero. Just as the author of the Shakespeare plays shows the English aristocracy as a caste that will set the nation to rights even when “the times are out of joint,” so now is the American elite seen as the bastion of righteousness which will set to rights even the most corrupt and untoward of governments, witness Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, JFK, All the President’s Men, and Amistad to name but a few.

How would Lord Oxford have been selected for such an assignment? We have established that he worked for the British secret service. But can we establish under whose command he was assigned? We do know that Sir Francis Bacon and his brother Anthony were the founders of the British secret service. We know that both Francis Bacon and Edward de Vere studied law at Gray’s Inn, one of the Inns of Court. We also know that Love’s Labor’s Lost and A Comedy of Errors were performed there for the first time at the Hall of Gray’s, the dining hall of the Inn of Court in 1594.31 What is certain beyond doubt is that Will Shakspere of Stratford-Upon-Avon did not and could not have studied at Gray’s Inn even if he wanted to because he was not of the noble class. It is even claimed that Bacon delighted in the theater and even performed masks himself, which he staged at Gray’s Inn. Could this have been under the inspiration of the Earl of Oxford?

Could it be that having witnessed the poetic gifts of the dramatist for himself, Bacon later thought to put them to good use for the sake of nation building? While Freemason scholars and other researchers have long promoted Bacon as the author of the Shakespeare plays, surviving titles of plays known to be Baconian resemble the titles of none of the Shakespeare plays:

The Birth of Merlin, 1589,
The Misfortunes of Arthur, 1587,
The Lord Mayor’s Pagaent, 29th
of October, 1591,
A Conference of Pleasure, 1592,
The Order of the Helmet or the Prince
of Purpool, 1594-5,
The Device of the Indian Prince, 159532

These titles dated within the same time frame in which the Shakespeare plays were being performed, often under the same titles in which they appear in the Folio, lack the sophistication and playfulness of the Shakespeare titles. And in the Device of the Indian Prince, a sonnet of Bacon’s preserved from the play shows that his verse falls fall short of the grace of the Bard:

Seated between the Old World and the New,
A land there is no other Land may touch,
Where reigns a Queen in Peace and Honour true,
Stories or Fables do describe no such.
Never did Atlas such a Burden bear,
As she in holding up the World Oppressed;
Supplying with her virtue everywhere
Weakness of Friends, Errors of Servants best.
No Nation breeds a warmer Blood for War,
And yet she calms them by Her Majesty;
No Age hath ever Wits refined so far,
And yet she calms them by her Policy;
To Her THY SON must make his SACRIFICE
If he will have the morning of his Eyes.33

Anyone who thinks that this is up to Shakespearean standard is either tone deaf, blind or lacking in aesthetic taste because this is simply bad verse and could not possibly be written by the same hand that penned the immortal lines written by the Bard. A great deal of similarity, however, has been found between Oxford’s early verse, penned under his own name, and Shakespeare’s. The Benezet test devised by Professor Louis P. Benezet is a good example of how many of the stylistic devices and language used by de Vere is identical to that of Shakespeare. The Benezet test, which juxtaposes de Vere’s early lines of verse with Shakespeare’s, has defied the efforts of numerous scholars to identify which lines are Oxford’s and which Shakespeare’s.34 Other clandestine operations were going on at this time.

Why is a propaganda ministry run by the secret service outside the realm of possibility? Not only was the English language canonized at this time, but the greatest literary works in the language were also being undertaken. Not only that, but the knowledge and wisdom of the classical writers, the histories of great nations, and practically everything else worth knowing from foreign countries was imported into the English language at this time. Books were printed and published on every art and science imaginable. In addition, the names on the title pages of these works are totally unknown. It is bewildering that so many men could be put to work on one arcane subject for the task of translating one book and one book only and to then disappear into the same obscure cloud from which they sprang.35 This suggests that they were under hire of the intelligence service just as readers and researchers are called in by the CIA today. It suggests a large clandestine operation designed to plunder the coveted secrets of the Continent as part of an orchestrated effort to import the Renaissance from the Continent. Revealingly, many of the books published during the period 1576 to 1598 are dedicated to the Queen, the Earl of Leicester, and Lord Burghley. Leicester was the Queen’s lover and Burghley, the Queen’s Chancellor.

Together they constituted the most powerful triumvirate in the country. Bacon’s intelligence service would naturally depend on funding from these personages in return for which the commissioned volumes would be dedicated to the benefactors.36 What is even more revealing from the intelligence service end of things is that Bacon oversaw the writing of many books in this period. He even supervised the printing process using his own wooden blocks, many of his own design, and each book under his direction was marked with such blocks, suggesting that he himself was acting as the national censor, ensuring on behalf of the Crown that every book published was politically correct.37

What is certain is that de Vere had the intelligence-gathering skills required for the job. He had visited the foreign courts, where he had been dispatched as a diplomat. What is said of Bertram inAll’s Well That Ends Well, where he is told, “You have sold your own lands to see other lands,” could equally be said of the Earl, who did appeal to Lord Burghley in a letter to do the very same by agreeing to pay for his expenses abroad. Oxford traveled widely on the Continent.38 He is known to have visited France and Italy with certainty.

The fact that he was granted official permission to travel in 1575 implies that he was both eminent and trusted, since it was difficult at this time for anyone to get permission to travel. The fact that his visit to the Continent was given the official seal of approval and that he was permitted to travel widely to Paris, Strasburg, Padua, Venice, Florence, and Sicily suggests that he was on official business probably on behalf of the Crown and that it constituted a diplomatic mission. The fact that he was recalled in 1576 pushes the case for a diplomat on official business, since his itinerary was being monitored and his person was valued enough to be dispatched and recalled.39 He was even known as the Italianate Englishman due to his tendency to wear the fashion of Renaissance Italy in the Court. He was also strongly influenced by Ovid, Particularly Ovid’s Metamorphosis, and was even referred to as the English Ovid. Oxford did travel in Italy extensively. He traveled with a retinue, according to Lord Burghley of eight people, including two gentlemen, two grooms, one payend (a dispursor of funds), a harbinger (someone who goes ahead to make arrangements), a housekeeper, and a trencherman (a cook).

The author of the Shakespeare plays was clearly well acquainted with Italy and its cities. Professor Ernesto Grillo notes that Italy herself is mentioned some 800 times in the plays, while her cities are mentioned severally, Rome 400 times, Venice 52, Naples 34, Milan 25, Florence 23, Padua 22, And Veronas 20. Genoa, Mantua, Pisa, Ferrera and other cities are also mentioned frequently.40 In addition, it is evident that the avant-garde Italianate theatrical form, commedia dell’arte is particularly in evidence in plays like Love’s Labour’s Lost. It was a form of comedy in which the plot was written out, but the dialogue improvised on the stage. George Lyman Kittredge holds the opinion that Shakespeare’s precise descriptions of scenes, laws, and customs spring from firsthand experience.41

In addition, there is the massive influence Italian and Roman authors exerted on the bard.Measure for Measure is influenced by the sixteenth century writer Giovambattista Cinzio; The Merchant of Venice is inspired by Il Pecorone of Florentino, 1588; A Midsummer Night’s Dreammust credit Ovid’s Metamorphosis as its muse. (And let us not forget that Oxford worked on the translation of Ovid’s Metamorphosis personally with his uncle Arthur Golding when still a boy);Much Ado About Nothing owes a debt to Matteo Bandello, a fifteen century writer of novellas or tales; The Taming of the Shrew is based on Arioto’s I Suppositi; and the basic plot of All’s Well That Ends Well is drawn from the ninth novella of the third day of Boccaccio’s Decameron.42 Then there is the fact that Shakespeare has borrowed so many loan words from the Latin.

Alfred Hart credits Shakespeare with employing a vocabulary of 17,677 words, twice that of Milton and two and a half times that of Marlowe. So dexterous was he with words that he was able to employ 7,200 words, more than occur in the King James’ version of the Bible. Lewis Theobold credits him with the massive suffusion of Latin words into English. So immense was the rhetoric of the Italian Renaissance that it amazes even modern researchers, and so great a master was Shakespeare of this rhetoric that he introduced the vocabulary and syntax of the Italian Renaissance to England. Even the sonnets are modeled on the Petrarchan form. In fact, Shakespeare can be credited with single-handedly bringing the Italian Renaissance to England.43
How could the Stratford man have gained so much firsthand knowledge about the Continent, particularly Italy? It was difficult even for nobles to travel at this time. A nobleman required special permission from the Queen to travel at a time when Protestant England was under siege by the Continent. The Throckmorton Plot to unseat the Queen and the northern uprising prove that England was under great peril and in constant danger of plots hatched by France and Spain. Under siege as she was, Elizabethan England had a moratorium on travel as strict as that of Soviet era Russia or North Korea today. It is unlikely Shakespeare would have ever been granted such permission to travel, and there is certainly no evidence from any of the documented record that he ever was.

It seems likely then that the author of the Shakespeare plays, which the author of this paper believes to be Edward de Vere, was dispatched to the Continent on an intelligence-gathering mission to the foreign courts and returned to England to dramatize what he had learned abroad. As part of the propaganda network operating under Sir Francis Bacon, founder and head of British intelligence, Oxford would have acted as a patron to the other writers employed by the propaganda syndicate, turning out plays with his apprentices that would have inspired great revelry at the revels. No Elizabethan scholar has ever pointed out the formulaic nature of the Elizabethan theater with its tendency toward histories, comedies and tragedies among the various dramatists.

It is as if they were all part of the same dramatic school. Even the titles of the plays among the various Elizabethan authors resemble each other, the Jonson play titled, Every Man Out of His Humor, resembling vintage Shakespeare. As propaganda, the history plays seem conceived to bring into relief the heroic exploits of the English nobility to cultivate a feeling of national identity and pride in the patriotic playhouse. The comedies, on the other hand, were designed to lampoon and satirize the foreign courts, particularly that of France and to paint then in a disparaging light, highlighting their decadence and dissolute ways.

Tragedies like Othello, Marlowe’s Tamburlaine, and Titus Andronicus, as already revealed, are designed to make foreign monarchs like Philip II of Spain look like homicidal maniacs. Then, there are the tragedies closer to home like Hamlet, which seem not to have the foreign court as its target, but the Elizabethan Court itself. This accounts for why a pen name was required.

Had Philip and other foreign monarchs been able to identify Oxford with the authorship of the very plays that so maligned them, the playwright would have made himself all too vulnerable to political assassination. Closer to home, the identification of the author as a man of Court would have exposed to public ridicule the high-ranking officials around him that are the targets of his plays, rendering him too vulnerable to political dangers including assassination. But even more serious is the issue of the plays and the sonnets, if read as Oxford’s, exposing the true nature of his relationship with the Queen, a problem which the establishment sought to remedy through damage control. Suppression of the author’s true identity was the means.44 Another motive for a British intelligence agent operating as a propagandist adopting a pen name is that he would make himself immune to both prosecution and persecution precisely because, if he were publicly censured, reprimanded and punished for any of his literary works, it would expose the very figures who wished themselves not to be identified with the brutes and monsters of his plays. What is evident beyond doubt is that the author of the Shakespeare plays is not only of the noble class, but subscribes to an ideology embracing peerage, caste, privilege and the entire edifice of feudal England.

It makes no sense whatsoever that a commoner from the country seeking a higher status and class position would subscribe to an ideology that would conspire to keep him in the mud. This safely eliminates the Stratford man from the authorship candidacy, since he would have no good reason to promote an ideology that would disqualify him from obtaining either respect or rank within his society. In Troilus and Cressida, there is an unmistakable appeal on the part of the dramatist to the need to maintain a caste system and its hierarchies of privileges, ranks and degrees. There are repeated references to the occult beliefs of Freemasonry. Allusions to ‘degree’ and its importance are repeated several times.

What must be stated here is that Freemasonry, which was based on the Egyptian mystery school tradition, was designed specifically to reinforce, safeguard and protect the aristocratic bloodlines in Europe just as the Egyptian mystery schools had formerly done in Egypt. Only aristocrats could belong to Freemasonry and they would be initiated into its higher degrees in order to protect the aristocratic bloodlines as part of an orchestrated effort to maintain their hegemony, privilege and purity. To the author of the Shakespeare plays, obedience to rank and degree was so natural that it made appeal to the order of nature itself. Freemasonry, to which the Earl of Oxford belonged, as most nobles of rank would, had a vested interest in promoting its ideology as a higher initiate, which he does through the personage of Ulysses:

The heavens themselves, the planets, and this center
Observe degree, priority, and place,
Insisture, course, proportion, season, form,
Office, and custom, in all line of order:
And therefore is the glorious planet Sol
In noble eminence enthron’d and spher’d
Amidst the other.
Troilus and Cressida, Act I.iii.ll.85-91

To understand these lines and their significance requires some rudimentary knowledge of Freemasonry. Sol is Latin for ‘sun’. The Sol Invictus religion was the religion of classical Rome and was a sun-worshipping cult. The Freemasonry secret society fraternity is pagan and is a sun-worshipping cult, exalting the sun as its highest principle.

The Sun is the king of the planets, so it may be said the King as the sovereign of the nation is the Sun or the sun god, and as such is no less than God in glory. High aristocratic caste is indistinguishable from high degree in Freemasonry, since only those initiates with the most royal blood and highest noble peerage would be able to rise to the highest degrees.

A higher-degree Freemason would certainly have the bloodline of kings. The ideology embraced by the fraternity was that caste had to be maintained, that bloodline could not be compromised or like metal it would suffer debasement. Shakespeare writes that degree and rank must be adhered to lest, as Ulysses maintains, disease and disorder reign: “O! when degree is shak’d,/ Which is the ladder to all high designs,/ The enterprise is sick….” I.ii.ll.101-103

In a poem from his youth called, Labour and Its Reward, Oxford, crediting himself as the author, writes, “The Mason poor that builds the lordly halls/ Dwells not in them: they are for high degree….”45 Oxford is referring to the system of initiation in Freemasonry based on degree, which assigns privilege to those of higher degree, those of more noble blood, who are initiated into the higher initiatory levels of the fraternity.

What is clear throughout the poem is that Oxford is lamenting the fact that there are many initiates of higher degree who outrank him. As a Mason, not only is he honor bound to maintain the secrets of the order, having taken a pledge to do so, but must also comply with what higher initiates within the order demand of him. I think it not at all far-fetched to suppose that Oxford has been required by his membership within Fra Rosi Cross, Freemasonry, and the British Secret Service, all founded by Sir Francis Bacon, to write secretly as an ‘invisible’ for purposes of personal safety as well as national security. The fact that Oxford as an author regrets the anonymity he must maintain is clear in two lines appearing near the end of the poem: “So he that takes the pain to pen the book/ Reaps not the gifts of goodly golden muse….”46 While being a higher degree initiate of Freemasonry, Oxford would have been surpassed in rank and degree by Bacon, who would have been a 33rd Degree Freemason and Master of the Order, and would have required the lower degree initiate to write anonymously as an agent of British intelligence, initiate of Freemasonry, Fra Rosi Cross, and courtier. While Bacon was over ten years younger than Oxford, he surpassed him in rank because his royal blood granted him higher peerage. Amazingly, according to Alfred Dodd, Bacon was not a commoner, but the secret son of Queen Elizabeth I and prince of the realm.47 Far from being the Virgin Queen known to posterity, Dodd and other researchers believe her to have had at least two children, including the Earl of Essex. His patriotic duty would have required him to be a spiritual martyr in the cause of nation building. He would not be entitled to enjoying the fruits of his labor.

He would be writing clandestinely as an intelligence man, dispatched on espionage missions to the Continent under the protection of diplomatic immunity, while covertly gathering intelligence on the royal courts of other lands, and then returning to England to dramatize what he had learned abroad as part of a state propaganda operation. He would also appropriate what had become institutions in Italy, including the Petrarchan Sonnet, the masterpieces of Ovid, Plutarch and others, superceding them in mastery and genius, exacting a cultural coup on the Continent that would leave England sitting prettiest, while holding the coveted prize of the greatest writer in European history, and what would be even worse medicine for the Europeans to bear, that this peerless writer was a commoner from the country.

The strongest evidence that the author’s works were not under his control and had been suppressed by a secret fraternity can be found in the preface to the first edition of Troilus and Cressida in 1609, appearing five years after the official date of Oxford’s death. The First Folio of Shakespeare’s works did not appear until 1623, some nineteen years after the Earl of Oxford’s death and seven years after the Stratford man’s death, suggesting that the bard did not exercise control over his own work. Having escaped the covetous hands of those who suppressed the other plays, Troilus and Cressida was somehow printed and distributed. The dedication is provocative because it gestures to the fact that the author and his works are intended for the highborn. It begins with the heading, “From a never writer to an ever reader. Newes.” This is highly suggestive, since it points to the fact that the author may never be acknowledged, since he is “a never writer, but that his work is addressed to “an ever reader,” an E. Ver reader perhaps hinted at by cryptic heading. The author of the dedication then writes, “Eternal reader, you have here a new play, never staled with the stage, never clap-clawed with the palms of the vulgar.” Does this sound like a dedication to a commoner from Stratford? If anything, it sounds like a nobleman praising the work of another nobleman, whose newly published work has managed to escape the hands of the vulgar commoners who have failed to exhibit it at the theater. It goes on to praise the author, while never referring once to Shakespeare, the author credited with the play by posterity. The dedication further alleges that, were the names of the comedies changed to commodities,

…you should see all those grand censors that
now style them such vanities flock to them for
the main grace of their gravities: especially
the author’s comedies, that are so framed to
the life, that they serve for the most common
commentaries of all the actions of our lives,
showing such a dexterity of wit, that those
most displeased with plays are pleased with
his comedies.
(Troilus and Cressida, Preface)

The dedication then ends with a reference to the “grand possessors,” which Stratfordians, those who believe the bard to be Will Shakspere from Stratford-Upon-Avon, naively believe refers to an acting company that has seized control of his plays. The reason this claim is naive is because “grand possessors” implies a body of individuals of noble rank and of considerable authority. Since we are on the subject of commodities, the author of this paper has put his money on it being the Freemasons, the Fra Rosi Cross fraternity, or some body within British intelligence service itself here referred to:

And believe this, that when he is gone, and his
comedies out of sale, you will scramble for
them, and set up a new English Inquisition.
Take this for a warning, and at the pleasure
of your peril’s loss, for not being sullied with
the smoky breath of the multitude; but thank
fortune for the ’scape it hath made amongst
you. Since by the grand possessors’ wills I
believe you should have prayed for them
rather than been prayed.
(Troilus and Cressida, Preface)

It is clear that the plays are in the clutches of unrevealed hands, “grand possessors” as they are called. By “grand possessors,” Stratfordians somehow have arrived at the amazing conclusion that an acting company is involved. Why the word “grand” then? “Grand” would hardly be a fitting word to apply to an acting company composed of common players.

What is far more likely is that Sir Francis Bacon’s intelligence service, Fra Rosi Cross secret literary society, or Freemasonry are implied. In his seminal biography on Sir Francis Bacon, Alfred Dodd, addressing the issue of the Shakespeare manuscripts, claims that the manuscripts were filed away for safekeeping with the “grand possessors,” who, according to the Preface of Troilus and Cressida of 1609 kept them in safe custody for the author.48 The Preface to Troilus and Cressida makes it abundantly clear that the plays are in the protective custody of the grand possessors.

The author of the Preface even suggests that Troilus and Cressida has been wrested away from the grand possessors against their wills, bidding the reader to, ‘…thank fortune for the ’scape it hath made amongst you. Since by the grand possessors’ wills I believe you should have prayed for them rather than been prayed.’ This suggests that the grand possessors exercise control over the plays and that their fate is subject to their wills. Granted, this could be with the author’s approval, but the opening lines suggest that the preface is partly written to the author himself in the form of a eulogy as in the words, “…for it is a birth of your brain that never undertook anything comical vainly.” (Troilus and Cressida, Preface) Note that the past form ‘undertook’ is used, implying that the products that are the birth of the author’s brain are in the past. Why not ‘undertake’, if in 1609, the author is still active and writing? The reasonable explanation for this is that the author was dead by this time and his work was now in the custody of a group of individuals functioning as executors and guardians of the deceased’s manuscripts. Since Edward de Vere is believed to have officially died in 1604, this could account for why the manuscripts are no longer in the author’s possession of under his control.

It was probably considered expedient by the Freemason fraternity to hold off on the release of the plays until after all the figures in the Elizabethan Court and English establishment alluded to or lampooned in the plays were dead. It is also probable that even an influential organization like Freemasonry could only suppress the true authorship through a generational delay, in which the release of the plays would be delayed by a span of some twenty years, by such time that the true bard, along with his political opponents, would have been forgotten. Since the hierarchy of the intelligence services is based on the initiatory degrees of Freemasonry, it is reasonable to suppose that those most highly placed in both command structures would be in many instances the same men. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to surmise that the Masons and the Elizabethan intelligence service were connected, since both Speculative Freemasonry and the British intelligence service were founded by Sir Francis Bacon and his brother Anthony, so that many of the same vanguard could be found in both fraternities. According to a contact in U.S. Naval Intelligence, higher ranking officers in the military and intelligence command structure of the United States are often either Freemasons or Rosicrucians. The same is the case for the British intelligence services.

Since Bacon is responsible for founding Fra Rosi Cross, Speculative Freemasonry in its modern form, and the British intelligence service, it is not difficult to give credit where credit is due. As a fraternity wielding great influence, Freemasonry would have been able to disseminate misinformation through the education system, easy enough to orchestrate since the university degree system is based on the first three degrees of Freemasonry, Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason, and could therefore control which theses on the bard would obtain Ph.D.s and which would not. This means that the organization controls who gains privilege within the university establishment. The release of disinformation and the control over information are then exercised by a steering committee that functions like the Invisible College Bacon refers to in The New Atlantis, dictating what the official view on the bard is going to be. What the preface to Troilus and Cressida appears to be saying is that the dramatist’s plays are held by members of a secret fraternity of noble peerage, such as Fra Rosi Cross or the Masons and that this play was somehow rescued from their control. This eliminates Bacon as the author. Why? Because if he were the founder and director of the secret societies in addition to the British intelligence service, how could the plays be wrested from his control?

It is self-evident that Bacon’s secret societies Fra Rosi Cross, later the Rosicrucians, and Freemasonry are behind the Stratford authorship ruse. They needed a front man to conceal the authorship of the ‘invisible’ who wrote the Shakespeare works. The Stratford man was selected as the commoner front man who would take credit for the works. This, in part, served to empower the lower classes by granting enormous dignity to a man from the lower ranks of society. This mission was part of Bacon’s secret enterprise. There is no way that Bacon could be the author of the plays. The Preface to Troilus and Cressida disqualifies him as the author. The power he wielded as the founder of Speculative Freemasonry and Fra Rosi Cross meant that he would exercise absolute control over his own plays.

Yet the Preface to Troilus and Cressida makes it explicit that the grand possessors have wrested the plays out of the dramatist’s control and that they are subjected to their will not the author’s. The plays cannot be Bacon’s, since Bacon was the head of all the fraternities implied by the “grand possessors” including, The Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet, Fra Rosi Cross, Speculative Freemasonry and British intelligence. How could the plays possibly be prized from his hands? Not only is Bacon the founder of the British Secret Service, he is the founder of the Freemason and Rosicrucian societies in their modern form. He is even responsible for the Thirty-three Degree system of initiation employed by the Freemason Craft today around the world.49 How could the plays be exercised from the control of a man who headed all the organizations who could have qualified for the designation “grand possessors”? Obviously, Bacon and one of his secret fraternities exercised control over the plays and not the author.

The author is clearly someone other than Bacon, an ‘invisible’ who worked under his authority and did not exercise control over his own plays. Edward de Vere is the only man other than Bacon whose life, peerage, education and craftsmanship could have qualified him for the role of Shakespeare. It is probably Oxford who had the plays wrested from his control.
What is clear from the record is that Ben Jonson has had a hand in the publication of the First Folio of plays. This we know because of his dedication, which appears in the Folio itself. Documented proof also exists that Sir Francis Bacon has had a hand in the Shakespeare plays at least at the planning level, since the Northumberland manuscript displays his name, along with the name William Shakespeare as well as the titles of several of the plays. What the author of this paper suspects is that the Shakespeare manuscripts were in the hands of a body referred to in the dedication to Troilus and Cressida as the “grand possessors” to which Jonson and Bacon belonged. It is Charlton and Dorothy Ogburn who have helped enlighten us on the identify of the “grand possessors” in their classic This Star of England. In 1615, the Earl of Pembroke became the Lord Chamberlain. It would therefore be with his approval that Ben Jonson would be nominated for the office of Master of the Revels. And it was at the Lord Chamberlain’s behest that Jonson was awarded a pension of 100 marks a year.

It the year 1621, Pembroke increased Jonson’s salary temporarily to 200 pounds a year. It will be remembered that the First Folio of the Shakespeare plays came out in 1623. We know that Jonson had a hand in the editing of the plays because we have all read his dedication to the Shakespeare works. Is it such wild speculation to suppose that he might be receiving a stipend from the Lord Chamberlain for his work on the Shakespeare manuscripts?

Not only was Ben Jonson on close terms with Lord Pembroke, he was on intimate terms with Lady Mary Pembroke as well. The “Incomparable Paire of Brethren” to whom the First Folio was dedicated, were the Countess of Pembroke’s two sons, William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, and Philip Herbert, Earl of Montgommery. Philip Herbert had married Edward de Vere’s daughter, Susan. A confederacy or fraternity involving all these people had already formed when Oxford was still alive. The Ogburn’s research has determined that the Countess of Pembroke, her two sons, the Earls of Pembroke and Montgommery, the Earl of Southampton, who some affirm to be Oxford’s illegitimate son, Sackville, Neville and others, all intimately connected with the Earl of Oxford, constituted the Virginia Company.50 Considering that the Virginia Company was under Charter of King James to develop the lands and resources of the colony of Virginia and whatever other territory in the New World it could lay its hands on, we can assume it was directly connected with Sir Francis Bacon’s ambitions in the American colonies as outlined in The New Atlantis.

There is ample evidence that Bacon had a hand in the plays. Baconian ciphers found in the plays and the Northumberland manuscript certainly link him to their production. It is probable that, as head of British intelligence and founder of Speculative Freemasonry and at least two secret literary societies, he would have advised Oxford on what themes, coded messages and other devices to include in the plays.

Bacon was in fact a cousin of the Cecil’s and thus a family relation of Lord Oxford. It is probable that they met when Oxford was but a child. Their intimacy would have only grown during their attendance at Gray’s Inn law school, where they both purportedly wrote and produced revels for the stage. While approximately a decade younger than Oxford, Bacon wielded great influence at Gray’s Inn, where many of the revels were performed, and was even installed there as dean for several years. Jonson was also closely connected with Bacon. There is ample evidence within the Jonson and Shakespeare canons to prove that Jonson and the author of the Shakespeare plays were both initiated Masons. This will be explored later in the paper.

Jonson paid Bacon the highest tribute in 1619, giving him the title “Dominus Verulamis” for his persuasive power, eloquence, and graces in delivering fine speeches. According to a noted source at the time identified as Judge Webb, Bacon was closely associated with Jonson long before he was created Lord St. Albans. He even engaged Jonson to compose a masque for the Christmas celebrations in 1617. Jonson would even go on to write a panegyric on Bacon on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday in 1621.

What is revealing is that, though Bacon would have been intimately familiar with his family relation, Lord Oxford, he never mentions him throughout the seven volumes of the Letters and Life of Francis Bacon, except once, and that in the formal list of peers who sat as Commissioners in the trial of Essex and Southampton. The author of this paper fully agrees with the Ogburns that Bacon and Jonson and the Freemason fraternity are responsible for orchestrating the hoax that has concealed the true authorship of the Shakespeare plays.51 Implicating Bacon and Jonson in the greatest literary hoax in history without implicating the Freemasons would be absurd, since the two men could not have acted alone and required the mobilization of a clandestine organization fully supportive of their scheme, and to which they both belonged, to successfully pull off one of the greatest orchestrated deceptions in world history.

In commemoration of the Freemason-led deception, a Freemasonic ceremony was held in July 1929 to lay the Foundation Stone of the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre at Stratford-upon-Avon, a fully laid on Masonic ritual conducted by Lord Amptill, pro-Grand Master of the United Lodge of England, in which he employed an old Egyptian stone maul used at Sakkhara four thousand years ago. Six hundred Masons were in attendance in full Masonic costume. 52

The author of this paper believes that the Earl of Oxford, the pseudonymous author of the Shakespeare plays, was martyred by the Masons as part of a Masonic ritual murder known as “The Killing of the King”. The sacrifice of authorship in art can be conceived as a reenactment of Jesus martyrdom as a kind of “passion play”, since it is the mystery and passion of the author’s sheer obscurity that peeks our curiosity and whets our appetite for discovery. It is a god-like enterprise retold in the Shakespearean Sonnets over and over again, the sacrifice that is to be answered at another time, the glory that is to spring from the silence at some future time. That the world will all at once see it, and wonder why they did not see it before is an event only a breath away.53 This explains the significance of the Freemasons using the stone maul from Sakkhara to lay the Foundation Stone of the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre. A stone maul was used in the murder of Hiram Abif, who Freemason lore tells us was the architect of King Solomon’s Temple, the Master Mason and guardian of the secrets of the Third Degree of Freemasonry.

The author of the Shakespeare plays actually foretells his own end in The Tempest. The scene in which the three ruffians, Caliban, Stephano and Trinculo plan to set upon Prospero and steal his books is in fact a reenactment of the murder of Hiram Abif from Freemasonic lore. The modus operandi Caliban outlines is drawn directly from the legend:

Why, as I told thee, ’tis a custom with him
I’ th’ afternoon to sleep: there thou mayst brain him
Having first seized his books; or with a log
Batter his skull, or paunch him with a stake,
Or cut his wezand with thy knife. Remember
First to possess his books; for without them
He’s but a sot, as I am, nor hath not
One spirit to command: they all do hate him
As rootedly as I. Burn but his books.
The Tempest, III.ii.ll.87-95

The name Prospero stands for the author and is probably to be taken as a play on the word ‘prosper’. Thus we have “Pro-Spear-O”, denoting ‘hope’ or ‘affirmation’, denoting the ‘spear’ of Shakespeare and the ‘spear’ Pallas Athena shakes at ignorance. At the same time, Prospero represents the Master Mason, Hiram Abif, while Caliban, Stephano and Trinculo represent the “Three Juwes” of Masonic legend, Jubila, Jubilum and Jubilo who conspired to steal the secrets of the Master Mason, Hiram Abif, at the Temple. The account of the fate that met Hiram Abif at the Temple is given in the Masonic Rite of the Third Degree:

His devotions being ended, he prepared to retire
by the south gate, where he was accosted by
the first of these ruffians, who, for want of a
better weapon, had armed himself with a plumb
rule, and in a threatening manner demanded of
our Master…the genuine secrets of Osiris,
warning him that death would be the consequence
of his refusal; but true to his obligation he replied
that those secrets were known to but three in
the world and that without the consent of the
other two, he neither could, nor would divulge
them…
This answer not proving satisfactory, the
Ruffian aimed a violent blow at out Master’s
forehead, but startled by the firmness of his
demeanour, it only glanced down the right
temple. Yet with sufficient force to cause him
to reel and sink to the ground on his left knee.
Recovering himself from this situation, he
rushed to the west gate where he stood
opposed by the second ruffian, to whom he
replied as before, yet with undiminished
firmness when the ruffian, who was armed
with a level struck a violent blow on the left
temple which brought him to the ground on
his right knee.
Finding all chances of escape in both
these quarters cut off, our Master staggered,
faint and bleeding, to the east gate where
the third ruffian was posted and who, on
receiving a similar reply to his insolent
demand…struck him a violent blow full in
the center of the forehead with a heavy
stone maul, which laid him lifeless at his
feet.54

The intended murder of Prospero is planned by three ruffians, representing the Three Juwes of Masonic lore, who intended to kill him with blows to the head with a wooden instrument, representing the maul of Masonic legend. The mischief they intend is to follow the stealing of Prospero’s books, which are symbolic of the secrets of the Master Mason. The murder was to take place at noon at the entrance to Prospero’s cell, the cell representing the Masonic Temple. The time of noonday is significant as it is the highpoint of the sun, which is of great ritual significance in the “Killing of the King” rites, since Osiris, the king, is the sun, and Horus, his son, is the son of Osiris, the sun god. 55

If the man posterity knows as Shakespeare was subject to a political assassination, would it not account for the disparate accounts concerning the cause of death, the absence of a will, a grave and other anomalies related to so great a personage? Would it not also provide an additional motive for concealing the true authorship of the greatest literary personality in history? Would not such a revelation be shaking a spear at the serpent of vice known as the British establishment, including the British Royal Family, government, intelligence service, educational establishment and Freemason network?
Further evidence from The Tempest confirms its status as a Masonic play. The strange appearance of the Widow Dido in The Tempest offers yet another reference to Hiram Abif, this time as the son of a widow:

Hiram, the widow’s son,
Sent to King Solomon,
The Great Keystone;
On it appears the name,
Which raises high the fame
Of all, to whom the same
Is truly known. 56

In certain Masonic ceremonies, i.e. the Third Degree, there is a substitution of Hiram Abif for the initiated candidate. The passage quoted from The Tempest refers to Hiram as the “widow’s son”. Masons even refer to themselves as “son’s of the widow” or “the widow’s sons”. The reason for this is that the expression has an intimate connection with the building of Solomon’s Temple and its architect. In the First Book of Kings, vii. 13 the following words appear: “And King Solomon sent and fetched Hiram of Tyre, a widow’s son of the tribe of Naphtali.” Hiram is therefore referred to as a widow’s son.

The Masons are referring back to this “widow’s son” of Biblical import in their rituals and ceremonies.57
There is ample evidence that the plays contain Hermetic and Ancient Mystery sources of Rosicrucian and Masonic origin. The Sonnets are pregnant with fertility god imagery of rebirth and revelation.58 References to Freemasonry abound in the Shakespeare plays. This is no surprise since the author is an initiate of Bacon’s Speculative Freemason fraternity and Bacon is responsible for founding all thirty-three degrees of Freemasonry, which are mini-dramas in themselves, the Third Degree on which the plot of The Tempest is based being but one. Just to prove the case that the plays were written by a high initiate of Freemasonry, a list of references is here made that the reader may judge for himself. There is a reference to Masonic apparel, accessories and symbols in The Merry Wives of Windsor consisting of the garter, and the compass in a ring. The garter is worn by Masons, while a square and compass are featured in a Masonic ring worn on the finger.

There is a reference to a young Masonic initiate in Much Ado About Nothing: “Is there no young squarer that will make a voyage with him to the devil?” (I.i.ll.69, 70) A reference to a candidate being initiated into the rites of the Third Degree in The Tempest with the following expressions employed by Caliban over the course of Act IV: “Be patient…I’ll bring thee…Hoodwink this…speak softly…This is the Mouth of THE CELL…No more…ENTER.” (IV) There is an allusion to the Worshipful Master in The Taming of the Shrew: “What! My old Worshipful Master.” (V.i.l.55) Then there is the Masonic ritual letter code referred to in Richard III: “And from the Cross Row plucks the letter G.” The Cross Row refers to the Rosy Cross of the Rosicrucians also known to Masons, and the letter ‘G’ so sacred to Masons refers to the Grand Geometrician or God, who is responsible for all sacred geometry, Temple design and architecture.59

From the evidence provided in the dedication to Troilus and Cressida, we already know that “grand possessors” have dispossessed the author of his books. Are these the ruffians he refers to inThe Tempest? We should note that the author’s primary concern in The Tempest is the issue of dispossession. Many scholars are in agreement that The Tempest is the last of the author’s plays. Not only does the author break his wand at the end of the play, but he sets the nature spirit that has been his muse, Ariel, free.60 Does this not signify that the master Prospero has hung up his hat? There is no question that he sees his artistic days as being at an end, Prospero’s epilogue seeming more like his final curtain call and last farewell:

Now my charms are all o’erthrown,
And what strength I have’s mine own,
Which is most faint: now, ’tis true,
I must be here confined by you,
Or sent to Naples. Let me not,
Since I have my dukedom got,
And pardon’d the deceiver, dwell
In this bare island by your spell…
(The Tempest, Epilogue)

First, the author addresses his waning artistic powers, which are nearly at an end. Then Prospero says, in what appears to be the author’s final address to the King, only fitting since the play is probably being staged for King James, “now, ’t is true,/I must be here confined by you,/ Or sent to Naples.” The choice has probably already been given to Oxford by King James either to be imprisoned in the Tower or sent into exile perhaps to Italy, where he is known to have cottaged in his younger days.

He then entreats the King not to exile him, since he has got back his dukedom. This corresponds to Oxford receiving back some of the landholdings the Queen had earlier confiscated and awarded to Leicester and others as patronage favors. He then indicates that it is under the king’s curse or “spell” that he is able to continue living on this bare island, that island possibly being the Isle of Man, where Oxford is rumored to have been sent into exile, an island that would of course have been barren. He then goes on to appeal to the King for clemency or mercy:

But release me from your bands
With the help of your good hands:
Gentle breath of yours my sails
Must fill, or else my project fails,
Which was to please.
(The Tempest, Epilogue)

In the above lines, Oxford seems to be appealing to the King for forgiveness, hoping that, if his play pleases, the King might see fit to release him from confinement on the island and fill his sails with his command that he might return to England, since the entire play was conceived to please the King and win his approval. He then complains of the despair from which he suffers that only prayer can deliver him from. He then appeals to the King to act according to the Golden Rule, forgiving him his trespasses, as he would have others forgive his:

And my ending is despair,
Unless I be relieved by prayer,
Which pierces so, that it assaults
Mercy itself, and frees all faults.
As you from crimes would pardon’d be,
Let your indulgence set me free.
(The Tempest, Epilogue)

Oxford concludes by appealing to the King to free him at his pleasure. Now compare Prospero’s epilogue with a story pertaining to Oxford related by Peter Sammartino in The Man Who Was William Shakespeare. The story goes that King James I was suspicious of Oxford because of the loyalty he had demonstrated to a protestant queen. James I knew of Oxford’s opposition to the former Scottish king being on the throne. He was reluctant to assassinate Oxford however, as he feared rebellion. He resolved instead on confining Oxford to the Tower of London.

It was at this time that Oxford’s sin-in-law, the Earl of Derby, suggested a compromise to King James. Since Oxford was the principle writer in all England, he should be permitted to live. Derby proposed that he be removed from the public arena so that he no longer posed a threat to the King. The King then gave Oxford a choice: oblivion or death. Oxford naturally would have chosen oblivion. This would have eliminated him as a political threat, for without the Earl in Court wielding his pen, no one could have discerned the message he imparted through the lines of his plays. It was at this time that he was pronounced officially death. This is said to have occurred at the official date of his death in 1604.

Oxford was then allegedly sent to the Isle of Man, which interestingly belonged to the Derby family. There he is said to have spent the rest of his life in isolation attended to by only one servant who brought him logs for the fire as well as food and water, another striking parallel to The Tempest, as Caliban is employed in the same daily tasks as the servant of Prospero. Oxford is said to have continued writing and revising his plays until his actual death in 1611.61 What is interesting about this story is that it seems to corroborate Prospero’s accounting of events in The Tempest’s epilogue and is therefore worth including in the body of this paper as a footnote. What happened at the hour of Oxford’s official death in 1604 is highly suspicious.

The events have been recorded in G.P.V. Akrigg’s Shakespeare and the Earl of Southampton. The events are of so extraordinary a nature that it raises suspicions about the allegation that Southampton, the “Fair Youth” referred to on the Sonnets, was in fact the illegitimate child of Oxford and a claimant to the throne. In fact, Oxfordian scholar Paul Streitz has proposed that Edward de Vere was actually Edward-Tudor-Seymour, the illegitimate son of Queen Elizabeth I, conceived through an elicit affair between a sixteen-year-old Princess Elizabeth and her stepfather Thomas Seymour.62 The reason events of that day seem to confirm this is that Southampton was arrested on June 24, 1604, the day of Oxford’s death, when a seeming panic erupted in King James’s Court. What this suggests is that the Earl of Southampton may have been perceived as a threat due to the fact that he himself may have been a claimant to the throne.

The king may have been concerned that, with Southampton’s father, Oxford, removed from the political landscape, Southampton may have developed an appetite for the throne. The king immediately ordered his heir to the throne to confine himself to chambers and called upon the protection of his loyal Scots guards. Southampton and other associates of the Earl of Oxford were arrested and taken to the Tower for questioning. Their personal papers and documents were also seized and examined, presumably for evidence of treasonous plotting.

The very next day they were set free. Despite the uproar over the incident, the authorities loyal to the king kept silent, no official explanation ever being offered, while details pertaining to the incident were suppressed. This finding was reported by Oxfordian Randall Barron to the Shakespeare Oxford Society Newsletter in the Fall, 1993 edition. Barron’s conclusion is that, among the papers and documents that were probably seized on the occasion would be Oxford’s own, since they were probably perceived as a national security threat.63

The register of Church of St. Augustine in Hackney tells us that Oxford died of the plague: “Edward de Vere, Erle of Oxenford, was buried the 6th day of July, anno 1604.” In the margin of the same page in the church register is the annotation “The plague.” He is supposed to have been interred here, yet no grave marker has ever been found. The Tudor church was destroyed in 1798, and the ancient gravestones, defaced by time, have been stacked against the church wall.64 The chances of ever finding evidence of his interment at Hackney parish church are exceedingly low. Regarding the Earl’s interment, Lady Oxford’s will attests to the fact that her husband was buried in the churchyard of Hackney parish church, as she stipulated in the passage from her will below that she wished to be laid there with her husband:

…in the Church of Hackney, within the county
Middlesex, as near unto the body of my late
dear and noble lord and husband as may be;
only I will that there be in the said Church
erected for us a tomb fitting our degree.65

Yet directly contradicting this is the testimony of Oxford’s first cousin, Arthur Golding’s son, who wrote of Oxford’s interment: “I will only speak what all men’s voices confirm: he was a man in mind and body absolutely accomplished with honorable endowments; he died at his house in Hackney in the month of June Anno 1604 and leith buried at Westminster.”65 Some researchers have accounted for this with the explanation that the Earl’s body was at some point exhumed for reburial at Westminster Abbey. When he allegedly died of the plague in 1604, and was purportedly buried in the churchyard at Hackney parish church, there was no memorial and he left no will.67 Is it not strange that one of the most legendary nobles in English history should receive no tribute and leave no will? This suggests that he died in disgrace or that his death deliberately received as little attention as possible. Can one conclude otherwise than that the circumstances of his life and death being deliberately suppressed? Even the stories related to his death are inconsistent. There is even a rumor that he survived beyond his official death in 1604 to live for an additional seven years in exile on the Isle of Mersea. True, this story might be of the same category of stories that attend the lives of larger-than-life figures such as Marlowe, Jim Morrison, and Elvis, all of whom have had mysterious circumstances attached to their deaths, but could it just be that the very mystery surrounding their deaths is due to something macabre and untoward? Could the riddle of de Vere’s death point to a yet unsolved homicide?
There are haunting examples of foreshadowing in the Shakespeare plays, in which the author seems to prophecy his own death and interment. While such references abound, this paper will examine two in which the characters in question are clearly identified with our Lord and author of the plays, they being King Henry V and Romeo. In Henry V, for instance, the king is haunted by the fear that he will be left without a tomb or grave, in which he sees it as his curse to be punished by not receiving a proper Christian burial should he fail in his campaigns in France:

Or there we’ll sit,
Ruling, in large and ample empery,
O’er France, and all her almost kingly dukedoms,
Or lay these bones in an unworthy urn,
Tombless, with no remembrance over them:
Either our history shall, with full mouth,
Speak freely of out acts; or else our grave,
Like Turkish mute, shall have a tongueless mouth,
Not worshipped with a waxen epitaph.
(Henry V, I.ii.ll.233-241.)

Square the above passage with the problem attending the mystery over Oxford’s interment. Where exactly is one of the greatest nobleman in England’s history buried or is he buried at all? Was it perhaps a Masonic punishment for those who betrayed the Order not to receive a proper burial and was that the fate he was threatened with, a prophecy that was eventually fulfilled? As for the speculation that the Earl may have been murdered by the Masons or indeed by King James’ henchmen, a fate he seems to fear and point to in play after play, we have the bone-chilling presentiment of Romeo preceding the mask, in which in an aside to the audience, he prophesies his own death.

I fear, too early; for my mind misgives
Some consequence yet hanging in the stars
Shall bitterly begin his fearful date
With this night’s revels and expire the term
Of a despised life, closed in my breast,
By some vile forfeit of untimely death.
(Romeo and Juliet, I.iv.ll.104-111)

The fact that the prophecy is uttered as an aside to the audience indicates that its relevancy is not so much related to Romeo’s imminent appearance at the ball, but is in fact meant to be taken in a context outside the play, as an aside. As is so often the case in Shakespeare, there is a double import to the character’s speech. While Romeo prophecies that some dark fate will begin to work its poison that night at the masked ball, which will end in his untimely death, so the author also had a predilection about his own death, the reference to “this night’s revels” as much applying to the author’s opening night at the theater as to the ball Romeo plans to attend, in which his highly charged ‘political’ play The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet will be staged for the first time. The implication is that the dark fate of untimely death and political assassination will begin its slow advance that night at the theater. The play Romeo and Juliet was most assuredly political. For those unversed in the background to the play, Oxford was imprisoned for a brief period for his affair with Anne Vavasor, one of the Queen’s handmaidens. Anne’s uncle challenged Oxford to a duel, which left them both wounded. Street battles between the Vavasor clan and Oxford and his acting troupe from Blackfriar’s Theatre took place over several months, providing the inspiration for the Montagues and the Capulets.68 Oxford took revenge in the balcony scene of Romeo and Juliet by having at the Queen:

But soft! What light from yonder window breaks?
It is the East and Juliet is the sun!
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon,
Who is already sick with grief
That thou her maid art far more fair than she,
Be not her maid, since she is envious.
Her vestal livery is but sick and green,
And none but fools do wear it. Cast it off.
(Romeo and Juliet, II.ii.ll.1-9)

The references here are unmistakable. The Queen was often referred to by the appellations Diana or Cynthia meaning ‘the moon’. The Tudor livery worn by all servants to the Queen was green and white’.69 There is no mistaking the fact that Juliet is here being referred to as the Queen’s maidservant. It is clear in Romeo’s speech that both the Queen and his lover Anne Vavasor, the Queen’s maidservant, are implied. The speech is undeniably to be taken as a snub at the Queen’s vanity in probable revenge on Romeo-Oxford’s part for the wounds of love caused him by the fair Rosaline, a character in which the Queen is also implied. This provides one more reason for the necessity of a pen name. Having been made to look foolish to her Court by Oxford’s portrayal of her in his play, she can hardly turn around and punish him for such an offense, since she would only make more of a spectacle of herself in the eyes of her courtiers. She is therefore compelled to pocket the insult. As a consequence of his shift from continental targets to targets closer to home, Oxford would of course have placed himself in far graver political danger. This latter fact accounts for the forlornness of Romeo’s prophecy.

On the occasion of Oxford’s ‘official’ death in 1604, the bard appears to have left no will. It is impossible to fathom why a man of his importance would have no concern for what became of his personal property and effects following his death.70 It is claimed that Oxford, probably in weakened health, succumbed to the plague. This claim is highly suspect. Breakouts of the plague usually occurred in London in the summer as the result of drinking water being contaminated by human and animal waste. The poet lived well north of the city in Hackney, where vulnerability to the plague would have been exceptional. Deaths resulting from the plague among the aristocracy were extremely rare.

71 Motives for murder or exile of a potential heir to the throne would be strong. And there is ample evidence that Oxford was the Queen’s son, the strongest of which is the signature Oxford used to sign all his personal letters up to the time of King James’s succession. The signature consisted of an overarching crown above his name and seven slash marks beneath his name. Had he succeeded Elizabeth on the throne of England, he would have been Edward VII. This practice of adorning his signature with a crown and seven slashes ceased following the Queen’s death and burial. Oxford’s Tudor signature appears in a letter to Robert Cecil dated April 25, 1603. Queen Elizabeth was interred at Westminster on April 28, 1603. In a letter to Robert Cecil following her burial, Oxford suddenly drops the practice. No other signatures extant following that date contain the marks denoting his divine right to Tudor succession because he would not be King.72 There is considerable circumstantial evidence that Oxford may have been murdered or exiled. It is interesting to note that his ‘official’ death or disappearance occurred only a year after the Queen’s death. Without the protection of the Tudor Queen, he may have found himself in an increasingly vulnerable position politically and socially. In addition, the Shakespeare canon provides strong evidence the author is the Queen’s son. As discovered by Alfred Dodd, the author’s sonnet-diary appears to contain an appeal to the Queen to acknowledge the author as her son and his right to succeed her.73 The appeal could not be more pointed in sonnet thirteen: “You had a father; let your son say so.” (13.14) Or the warning given in sonnet fourteen more explicit: “Or else of thee this I prognosticate,-/Thy end is truth’s and beauty’s doom and date.” (14.13-14) Given that Elizabeth was famed for her beauty and given that Oxford was officially of the line of de Vere or the House of Vere, the words ‘truth’ and ‘beauty’ appear to refer to their respective lines of heredity as Queen and son, since the name Vere is implied by the word ‘truth’. Further evidence for the author’s link to the Tudor line can be found in the oft quoted line by Juliet:

What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo called,
Retain the dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. (II.ii.ll. 43-47)

The reference to the ‘rose’ is a veiled reference to the Tudor rose. Thus, the bard’s lineage would have the same pedigree whether or not he bore the name associated with the Tudor line. His pedigree would therefore remain sweet scented no matter what name he bore. The prince is of the sweet Tudor rose lineage whatever name he goes by. The prince will thus retain the peerage and perfection of his birth even without the title associated with the Tudor royal bloodline, the Rosy Cross.
As the author of this paper, I hesitated before releasing my findings to the world. I even contacted some Baconian scholars to test my findings out on them, including the composite portrait analysis. While I met with a courteous reception, the Baconian scholars dismissed my findings. I believe that our vision is always attenuated by a certain amount of bias. I have endeavored to overcome my bias by being as objective as possible about the authorship problem. I respect the Baconian position a great deal, but given the weight of evidence supporting my view of the authorship, I have come down on the side of the Oxfordians. This was a painful and tortured position to arrive at. My investigation into the authorship question will continue. I have no wish to mislead the world. Great circumspection and vigilance are required in order to give Shakespeare and the authorship problem a proper burial. 2004 will be the fourth centenary of the Earl of Oxford’s ‘official’ death. The author of this paper intends to celebrate the occasion in style, commemorating his death by deifying him among the pantheon of literary gods as the author of the greatest works in the world canon and holding a celebration to mark the occasion on the 6th of June.

Notes

1 Diana Price, Shakespeare’s Unorthodox Biography: New Evidence of an Authorship

Problem. London: Greenwood Press, 2001, 125.
2 Diana Price, 19.
3 Rolland DeVere, A Student’s Guide to the Shakespeare Mystery. Hunting Valley, OH:

The U of School P, 1993, 12, 13.
4 Diana Price, 11.
5 Diana Price, 11.
6 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious William Shakespeare: The Myth and the Reality.

McCeal, VA: EPM Publications, Inc., 98.
7 Charlton Ogburn Jr., 26.
8 Charlton Ogburn Jr., 97.
9 Charlton Ogburn Jr., 234.
10 Peter Sammartino, The Man Who Was William Shakespeare. New York: Cornwall

Books, 1990, 52.
11 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1).

Rider & Co., 1949, 131.
12 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., 747.
13 Peter Sammartino, The Man Who Was William Shakespeare, 60.
14 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1), 137.
15 William T. Smedley, The Mystery of Sir Francis Bacon, Mila, MT: Kessinger

Publishing, Reprint, Originally Published in 1910, 102.
16 Anonymous poem attributed to John Lyly quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr.’s The

Mysterious Wm. S., 705.
17 John Davies’s poem quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr.’s The Mysterious Wm. S., 104.
18 John Davies’s poem quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr.’s The Mysterious Wm. S., 104.
19 Richard F. Whalen, Shakespeare: Who Was He? The Oxford Challenge to the Bard of

Avon, Westport CT: Praeger Publishers, 1994, 26, 27.

20 The Queen’s Privy Seal Warrant quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious

Wm. S., 688.
21 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., 688, 689.
22 Thomas Heywood’s Apology for Actors quoted in Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr.,

This Star of England. New York: Coward McCann, Inc., 1852, 710.
23 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious William Shakespeare, 694.
24 Venetian Ambassador of Spain’s Report to Philip II quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr.’s

The Mysterious Wm. S., 692.
25 Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr., This Star of England, 711.
27 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., p.694.
28 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1), 130.
29 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., 694, 695.
30 Marlowe’s Tamburlaine quoted in The Mysterious Wm. S., 693.
31 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious Wm. S., 453.
32 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1), 154.
33 Francis Bacon sonnet from The Device of the Indian Prince quoted from Alfred

Dodd’s Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1), 158.
34 Richard F. Whalen, 143-145.
35 William T. Smedley, 98.
36 William T. Smedley, 98.
37 William T. Smedley, 109.
38 Peter Sammartino, The Man Who Was William Shakespeare, 88, 89.
39 John Mitchel. Who Wrote Shakespeare? London: Thames and Hudson, 1996, 161.
40 Peter Sammartino, 90.
41 Peter Sammartino, 88.
42 Peter Sammartino, 89.
43 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., 291, 292.

44 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Man Who Was William Shakespeare: A Summary of the Case

Unfolded in the Mysterious William Shakespeare, Delaphane, VA: EPM Publications, Inc.,

1995, 41.
45 Edward de Vere, “Labour and Its Reward” in The Poems of Edward de Vere,

http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/poemslny.htm

46 Edward de Vere, “Labour and Its Reward”.
47 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol.1), 80, 81.
48 Alfred Dodd, 161.
49 Alfred Dodd, 62.
50 Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr., 1208, 1209.
51 Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr.. 1210, 1211.
52 Peter Dawkins, Shakespeare and Freemasonry, 1997, from

http://sirbacon.org/Dawkinsfrmsnry.htm.

53 W.F.C. Wigston, Bacon, Shakespeare and the Rosicrucians. London: Redway, 1888,

Preface, xviii.
54 Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key. London: Arrow Books, Ltd.,

1997, 175.

55 Peter Dawkins, Shakespeare and Freemasonry.
56 Lines from “The Tempest” quoted in W.F.C. Wigston’s Bacon, Shakespeare and the

Rosicrucians, 134.
57 W.F.C. Wigston, 134, 135.

58 W.F. C. Wigston, 134, 135.
59 Peter Dawkins, Shakespeare and Freemasonry.

60 W.F.C. Wigston, 174.

61 Peter Sammartino, 11, 12.

62 Paul Streitz, Oxford: Son of Queen Elizabeth I. Darien, CT: Oxford Institute Press,

]2001, 98.

63 John Mitchel, 174, 175.
64 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious Wm. S., 765.

65 Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr., 1198.
66 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious Wm. S., 43.

67 John Mitchel, 162.
68 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious Wm. S., 656, 657.

69 Charlton Ogburn Jr., 656.

70 Paul Streitz, 138.

71 Paul Streitz, 158.
72 Paul Streitz, 157.

73 Alfred Dodd, 120.

References

Altrocchi, Paul Hemenway. Most Greatly Lived: A Biographical Novel of Edward de Vere, Seventeenth Earl of Oxford, Whose Pen Name Was William Shakespeare. Xlibris Corporation, 2000.

Dawkins, Peter. Shakespeare and Freemasonry at http://sirbacon.org/Dawkinsfrmsnry.htm.

DeVere, Rollin. A Hawk from a Handsaw: A Student’s Guide to the Shakespeare Mystery. Hunting Valley, Ohio: The University School Press, 1993.

Dodd, Alfred. Francis Bacon’s Personal Life Story (Vol. 1 & 2). London: Rider & Co., 1949.

Knight, Christopher & Robert Lomas. The Hiram Key. London: Arrow Books Ltd., 1997.

Mitchell, John. Who Wrote Shakespeare? London: Thames and Hudson, 1996.

Obgurn, Charlton. The Man Who Was Shakespeare: A Summary of the Case Unfolded in The Mysterious William Shakespeare. Delaplane, VA: EPM Publications, Ltd., 1995.

Ogburn, Charlton. The Mysterious William Shakespeare: The Myth and the Reality. Mclean, VA: EPM Publications, ltd., 1995.

Ogburn, Dorothy and Charlton. This Star is England. New York: Coward-McCann, Inc., 1952.

Orville, W. Owen. Sir Francis Bacon’s Cipher Story. Montana: Kessinger Publishing, Reprint.

Price, Diana. Shakespeare’s Unauthorized Biography: New Evidence of an Authorship Problem. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001.

Rogers, L.W. Rogers. Occultism in the Shakespeare Plays. Montana: Kessinger Publishing, Reprint.

Sammartino, Peter. The Man Who Was William Shakespeare. London: Cornwall Books, 1990.

Smedley, William T. The Mystery of Sir Francis Bacon. Montana: Kessinger Publishing, Reprint: First Published in 1910.

Streitz, Paul. Oxford Son of Elizabeth I. Darien, CT: Oxford Institute Press, 2001.

Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works with particular attention to Henry IV Part I & 2,Henry V, Romeo and Juliet, and The Tempest.

Whalen, Richard F., Shakespeare: Who Was He? The Oxford Challenge to the Bard of Avon. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1994.

Wigston, W.F.C., Bacon, Shakespeare and the Rosicrucians. London: Geaorde Redway, 1888.